early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina … · 2019. 11. 16. · 1980)...
TRANSCRIPT
Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable
angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent
era (Review)
Hoenig MR, Aroney CN, Scott IA
This is a reprint of a Cochrane review, prepared and maintained by The Cochrane Collaboration and published in The Cochrane Library
2010, Issue 3
http://www.thecochranelibrary.com
Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
1HEADER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19AUTHORS’ CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
29CHARACTERISTICS OF STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
33DATA AND ANALYSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use, Outcome
1 Index Death. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use, Outcome
2 Early Death. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Analysis 1.3. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use, Outcome
3 Intermediate Death. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Analysis 1.4. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use, Outcome
4 Late Death. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Analysis 1.5. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use, Outcome
5 Index Myocardial Infarction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Analysis 1.6. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use, Outcome
6 Early Myocardial Infarction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Analysis 1.7. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use, Outcome
7 Intermediate Myocardial Infarction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Analysis 1.8. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use, Outcome
8 Late Myocardial Infarction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Analysis 1.9. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use, Outcome
9 Index Death or Non-Fatal MI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Analysis 1.10. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use,
Outcome 10 Early Death or Non-Fatal MI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Analysis 1.11. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use,
Outcome 11 Intermediate Death or Non-Fatal MI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Analysis 1.12. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use,
Outcome 12 Intermediate Death or Non-Fatal MI; Gender Sub-Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Analysis 1.13. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use,
Outcome 13 Late Death or Non-Fatal MI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Analysis 1.14. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use,
Outcome 14 Intermediate Refractory Angina. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Analysis 1.15. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use,
Outcome 15 Intermediate Rehospitalization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 Safety end-points, Outcome 1 Procedure-related MI. . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Analysis 2.2. Comparison 2 Safety end-points, Outcome 2 Bleeding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Analysis 2.3. Comparison 2 Safety end-points, Outcome 3 Stroke. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
51ADDITIONAL TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
54APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
58WHAT’S NEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
58HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
58CONTRIBUTIONS OF AUTHORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iEarly invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
59DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
59INDEX TERMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
iiEarly invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
[Intervention Review]
Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstableangina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stentera
Michel R Hoenig1 , Constantine N Aroney2, Ian A Scott3
1Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Brisbane, Australia. 2Department of Cardiology, Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.3Internal Medicine Department and Clinical Services Evaluation Unit, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Australia
Contact address: Michel R Hoenig, Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital, Herston, Brisbane, 4029, Australia.
Editorial group: Cochrane Heart Group.
Publication status and date: New search for studies and content updated (no change to conclusions), published in Issue 3, 2010.
Review content assessed as up-to-date: 13 August 2008.
Citation: Hoenig MR, Aroney CN, Scott IA. Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST ele-
vation myocardial infarction in the stent era. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD004815. DOI:
10.1002/14651858.CD004815.pub3.
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
A B S T R A C T
Background
In patients with unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI) two strategies are possible, either a routine
invasive strategy where all patients undergo coronary angiography shortly after admission and, if indicated, coronary revascularization;
or a conservative strategy where medical therapy alone is used initially, with selection of patients for angiography based on clinical
symptoms or investigational evidence of persistent myocardial ischemia.
Objectives
To determine the benefits of an invasive compared to conservative strategy for treating UA/NSTEMI in the stent era.
Search methods
The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 1), MEDLINE and EMBASE
were searched (1996 to February 2008) with no language restrictions.
Selection criteria
Included studies were prospective trials comparing invasive with conservative strategies in UA/NSTEMI.
Data collection and analysis
We identified five studies (7818 participants). Using intention-to-treat analysis with random-effects models, summary estimates of
relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were determined for primary end-points of all-cause death, fatal and non-fatal
myocardial infarction, all-cause death or non-fatal myocardial infarction, and refractory angina. Further analysis of included studies
was undertaken based on whether glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists were used routinely. Heterogeneity was assessed using Chi2 and variance (I2 statistic) methods.
1Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Main results
In the all-study analysis, mortality during initial hospitalization showed a trend to hazard with an invasive strategy (RR 1.59, 95% CI
0.96 to 2.64). The invasive strategy did not reduce death on longer-term follow up. Myocardial infarction rates assessed at 6 to 12
months (5 trials) and 3 to 5 years (3 trials) were significantly decreased by an invasive strategy (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.86; and RR
0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.92 respectively). The incidence of early (< 4 month) and intermediate (6 to 12 month) refractory angina were
both significantly decreased by an invasive strategy (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.68; and RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.83 respectively),
as were early and intermediate rehospitalization rates (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41to 0.88; and RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.74 respectively).
The invasive strategy was associated with a two-fold increase in the RR of peri-procedural myocardial infarction (as variably defined)
and a 1.7-fold increase in the RR of (minor) bleeding with no hazard of stroke.
Authors’ conclusions
Compared to a conservative strategy for UA/NSTEMI, an invasive strategy is associated with reduced rates of refractory angina and
rehospitalization in the shorter term and myocardial infarction in the longer term. However, the invasive strategy is associated with a
doubled risk of procedure-related heart attack and increased risk of bleeding and procedural biomarker leaks. Available data suggest
that an invasive strategy may be particularly useful in those at high risk for recurrent events.
P L A I N L A N G U A G E S U M M A R Y
Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Patients with prolonged or recurrent chest pain may have a condition called unstable angina or suffer a certain type of heart attack
called non-ST elevation myocardial infarction. These conditions can be managed with two main treatment strategies. Several studies
have been done to determine which strategy is superior. In one strategy, the routine invasive strategy, all patients have a catheter inserted
to image their coronary arteries and look for atherosclerotic narrowing. If a significant narrowing or complicated plaque is found then
the artery may be dilated by means of a balloon catheter that is inserted and inflated across the narrowing. The patency of the vessel is
maintained by insertion of a metallic stent. In some cases, the narrowing will not be amenable to this approach and surgery to bypass
the narrowing is required. In the other conservative strategy, patients are initially treated with drugs and only those who suffer more
chest pain while receiving the drugs or who demonstrate evidence of atherosclerotic narrowing as suggested by other non-invasive tests,
such as stress testing or imaging, undergo coronary angiography and revascularization if indicated.
There has been debate as to which strategy is better. The invasive strategy reduces the incidence of further chest pain or rehospitalization.
Also, long-term follow up from three studies suggests that it reduces the risk of having a heart attack in the three to five years following
the event by 22%. However, the invasive strategy is associated with a doubled risk of procedure-related heart attack and increased risk
of bleeding. Hence, available studies suggest that the invasive strategy may have particular benefit in patients who are at higher risk for
recurrent events and that patients at low risk for a recurrent event may not derive benefit from invasive intervention. The level of risk
that warrants intervention requires considerable further research.
B A C K G R O U N D
The diagnosis of acute coronary syndromes
The acute coronary syndrome (ACS) encompasses three disorders
of related etiology. These are ST-elevation myocardial infarction
(STEMI), non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI)
and unstable angina (UA). The management of STEMI dif-
fers from that for UA and NSTEMI, which may be considered
as one clinical entity (UA/NSTEMI). The pathogenesis of UA/
NSTEMI involves five non-exclusive causative factors of non-
occlusive thrombus on pre-existing plaque, dynamic obstruc-
tion, progressive mechanical obstruction, inflammation, and sec-
ondary unstable angina associated with increased cardiac work load
(Braunwald 1998). Of these factors, thrombus formation on pre-
existing plaque, that is acute plaque change, is the most common.
2Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Indeed, the majority of patients with ACS have an acute change
in coronary atherosclerotic plaques, with STEMI usually associ-
ated with complete occlusion of the involved vessel(s) (DeWood
1980) and UA/NSTEMI usually associated with subtotal occlu-
sion (DeWood 1986; TIMI-IIIA 1993). The distinction between
UA and NSTEMI depends on the presence of myocardial infarc-
tion as determined by markers of myocardial damage such as tro-
ponin I (TnI), troponin T (TnT) or creatine kinase (CK-MB).
Compared to STEMI, NSTEMI has a lower 30-day mortality
rate but more recurrent ischemia and a similar one-year mortal-
ity rate (Armstrong 1998). UA/NSTEMI is much more common
than STEMI; in the United States, 1.4 million patients per year
are admitted to hospital with ACS, approximately 70% with UA/
NSTEMI (Rosamond 2008). Whereas emergency percutaneous
coronary revascularization is now a commonly used therapy for
treating STEMI (Antman 2004; Cucherat 2003), the role of an-
giography and possible subsequent revascularization is less clear
in UA/NSTEMI. In overview, treatment of UA/NSTEMI ini-
tially involves medical therapy followed by one of two manage-
ment strategies involving different rates of angiography and revas-
cularization. The medical therapies for UA/NSTEMI are briefly
reviewed before the focus of this review shifts to the management
strategies of patients with UA/NSTEMI.
Initial medical management of UA/NSTEMI
In brief, medical treatments as outlined in the American College
of Cardiologists (ACC) and American Heart Association (AHA)
guidelines (Anderson 2007) fall into the two major groups of
anti-ischemic therapies and anti-platelet or anti-coagulation ther-
apies. Anti-ischemic therapies include bed rest, nitroglycerin, beta
blocker (or non-dihydropyridine calcium antagonist if beta block-
ers are contraindicated) and an ACE inhibitor. Anti-platelet or
anti-coagulation therapies include aspirin, clopidogrel, heparin
and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists. Randomized trial
evidence to support use of most of these specific therapies has
been published. Of anti-ischemic treatments, beta blockers have
proven efficacy in patients with evolving myocardial infarction
(Hjalmarson 1982; Yusuf 1988) as well as in patients with UA/
NSTEMI (Gottlieb 1986; Muller 1984; Theroux 1985). Non-di-
hydropyridine calcium channel antagonists have proven efficacy in
ACS (Boden 1991; Gibson 1986; Pepine 1998; Tijssen 1987) and
are particularly useful in patients with contraindications to beta
blockers. Both the early and late administration of angiotensin
converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors have been shown to be ben-
eficial in myocardial infarction (EUROPA 2003; HOPE 2000;
Rodrigues 2003). Of the anti-platelet or anti-coagulation treat-
ments, aspirin has a consistent benefit in UA/NSTEMI as demon-
strated in several clinical trials (Cairns 1985; Lewis 1983; RISC
1990; Theroux 1988). Likewise, clopidogrel has been shown to
be beneficial in addition to aspirin (CURE 2001). Heparin, in its
various forms, or fondaparinux have also been shown to be benefi-
cial in UA/NSTEMI (Gurfinkel 1995; Mehta 2008; Neri Serneri
1990; RISC 1990; Theroux 1993). The glycoprotein IIb/IIIa re-
ceptor antagonists have proven efficacy in medical treatment of
UA/NSTEMI (Boersma 2002; PRISM-PLUS 1998; PURSUIT
1998; Roffi 2002; Topol 1999) with the exception of abciximab
(Simoons 2001). However, this class of drugs appears to have dif-
ferential effects depending on the patients’ risk level, with high-
risk patients obtaining the most benefit. The glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor antagonists warrant special mention with regard to their
use in invasive procedures. This concept is expanded on later.
Management following initial medicaltreatment: what is the role of early coronaryangiography and revascularization?
Two different treatment strategies may be followed after initial
medical treatment of UA/NSTEMI, an early invasive strategy of
coronary angiography and, if indicated, revascularization in most
or all patients who have no contraindication to such an approach;
or a conservative (’ischemia guided’) strategy in which patients
undergo coronary angiography and revascularization only if there
is evidence of recurrent ischemia. Examples are recurrent infarc-
tion, angina at rest, dynamic ST changes on electrocardiograph
(ECG) or definitive inducible ischemia on provocative testing.
Proponents of the early invasive strategy argue that the early de-
termination of coronary anatomy can be used to tailor therapy,
avoid lengthy hospital stays and prevent further events. For exam-
ple, patients with normal coronary anatomy and minimal lume-
nal disease may be discharged. Those with coronary disease ev-
ident on angiography can be treated expeditiously according to
their angiographic findings, which may include revascularization
via percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) comprising coro-
nary angioplasty with or without insertion of coronary stent, or
coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Proponents of the con-
servative strategy argue that medical therapy can stabilize patients.
Stress testing can identify patients at risk of future events and who
would therefore benefit most from invasive intervention, and the
costs and complications of invasive procedures can be minimized
by using invasive strategies more selectively. The evidence for the
relative benefits and harms of these two approaches is the subject
of this review.
Interpretation of the evidence from trials:changes in contemporary clinical practice
In routine clinical practice, the outcomes of invasive coronary pro-
cedures vary depending on a number of factors such as clinical
expertise (Singh 2000); volume of procedures undertaken (Magid
2000); and methods and protocols used, especially in regard to
pharmacological and procedural co-interventions. Of particular
importance in contemporary practice are the use of glycopro-
3Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
tein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists (CAPTURE 1997; EPIC 1994;
EPILOG 1997; EPISTENT 1998; Karvouni 2003) and coro-
nary artery stents (Al Suwaidi 2004), both of which have been
shown to improve outcomes and reduce complications when used
with invasive procedures. A report from the TIMI study group
highlighted the importance of adjunctive therapy in the invasive
strategy (Sabatine 2004). The TIMI group undertook two trials,
with identical enrolment criteria, investigating treatment strate-
gies in UA/NSTEMI, TIMI-3b 1995 and TACTICS-TIMI 18
(2001). The two trials were nearly a decade apart and, compared to
TIMI-3b 1995, the more recent TACTICS-TIMI 18 study used
pre-procedural (upstream) glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antago-
nists and stents as standard treatment. Importantly, after adjust-
ment for baseline risk, an early invasive strategy tended to have
more favorable results in TACTICS-TIMI 18 than in TIMI-3b
1995. Further, stents with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antago-
nists as adjuncts to PCI have been associated with lower mortality
(7.3% versus 14.4% at 6 months) compared to PCI with neither
of these adjuncts, in the real-world GRACE registry (Montelascot
2003). Also, a meta-regression analysis of trials comparing early
invasive and conservative strategies in UA/NSTEMI identified ag-
gressive anti-platelet therapy and stenting as the two most sig-
nificant predictors of the benefit of an invasive strategy in US/
NSTEMI (Biondi-Zoccai 2005).
Stenting is associated with fewer major adverse cardiovascular
events and a reduced need for emergency cardiac surgery (Al
Suwaidi 2004). Specifically, the reduction in target vessel revas-
cularization associated with stenting is of particular relevance to
trials with longer durations of follow up. More recently, in pa-
tients with UA/NSTEMI treated with an early invasive strategy,
bivalirudin with ’bailout’ glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antago-
nists has been proposed to produce non-inferior outcomes on is-
chemia end-points compared to standard heparin with glycopro-
tein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists (Stone 2006, Stone 2007). How-
ever, the substitution of bivalirudin for herapin with glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists probably should not be undertaken
unless patients have been pre-treated with a thienopyridine prior
to angiography (Stone 2006). If the result of the ACUITY trial
(Stone 2006) is confirmed, and future trials examining treatment
strategies in UA/NSTEMI are undertaken using bivalirudin, these
studies might be compared with studies that routinely used IIb/
IIIa receptor antagonists during PCI.
Rationale for this review
UA/NSTEMI is a common hospital presentation and carries a
significant mortality and risk for recurrent ischemic events. This
review evaluated the relative merits of these strategies. The findings
of this review are relevant to patients, physicians and to healthcare
systems.
O B J E C T I V E S
The objectives of this review were two fold, to determine the ben-
efits and harms of:
(1) an early invasive strategy compared to a conservative strategy
for the management of UA/NSTEMI in the stent era;
(2) an early invasive strategy with and without glycoprotein IIb/
IIIa receptor antagonists versus a conservative strategy for the man-
agement of UA/NSTEMI in the stent era.
M E T H O D S
Criteria for considering studies for this review
Types of studies
Only studies undertaken in the stent era were considered for inclu-
sion. If non-stent studies were to be included, the analysis would
under-estimate the benefits of an early invasive strategy on end-
points such as recurrent angina and rehospitalization (for example
due to chest pain). The studies were randomized controlled clini-
cal trials comparing invasive and conservative strategies in patients
with UA/NSTEMI where at least one of this review’s outcomes
was measured. Revascularization approaches in studies that were
included consisted of PCI or CABG as required. Stents had to
be used appropriately in patients undergoing revascularization via
PCI. Studies that did not meet this criterion were not deemed
relevant to current practice and were excluded. The effects on out-
comes of use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists were
investigated further by undertaking two separate analyses of trials
that did and did not routinely use glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor
antagonists during percutaneous revascularization.
Analysis 1: all studies that deployed stents routinely in revascular-
ization procedures using PCI, regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor antagonist use;
Analysis 2: stents and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists
deployed routinely in revascularization procedures using PCI;
Analysis 3: stents but not glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists
deployed routinely in revascularization procedures using PCI.
Types of participants
Included studies recruited men and women aged at least 18 years
who had an episode of angina with an accelerating pattern of pain
at rest. The episode of pain must have occurred within 72 hours
of randomization. Further, the patients were required to have at
least one of the following:
(1) new ST depression;
4Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
(2) transient (< 20 minute) ST elevation;
(3) ischemic T-wave inversion or T-wave inversion in at least two
contiguous leads;
(4) elevated levels of cardiac markers i.e. troponins or creatine
kinase (CK-MB);
(5) coronary artery disease, as determined by a history of catheter-
ization, revascularization, or ACS.
Included studies excluded patients if they had any of the following:
(1) persistent ST elevation (i.e. > 20 minutes);
(2) secondary angina (e.g. due to anemia or thyrotoxicosis);
(3) serious systemic disease or major co-morbidities that would
preclude an invasive approach;
(4) severe congestive heart failure or cardiogenic shock.
Types of interventions
All patients with UA/NSTEMI were initially treated with some or
all of the medical therapies discussed in the background; these are
summarized in Table 1. Following initial medical therapy, patients
were randomized to either early invasive or conservative treatment.
The two treatment strategies differed with regard to the use of
angiography and subsequent revascularization rates.
The two management strategies that were compared were as fol-
lows.
(1) Routine invasive strategy: routine angiography with or without
revascularization in all patients. This was carried out in all eligible
patients unless they had contraindications to angiography.
(2) Conservative strategy: angiography with or without revascular-
ization only in eligible patients with evidence of cardiac ischemia
e.g. recurrent ischemia, dynamic ECG changes or a positive stress
test.
Revascularization modalities included PCI or CABG, depending
on angiographic findings. CABG is indicated in lieu of PCI when
one of the following criteria are met:
• three vessel disease and an ejection fraction (EF) < 0.50;
• two vessel disease with proximal left anterior descending
involvement and EF < 0.50 or ischemia;
• left main coronary artery disease.
Types of outcome measures
Primary outcomes
(1) Death: all causes
(2) Myocardial infarction (this end-point only included non-fatal
myocardial infarction in the review protocol but the review in-
cludes fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction)
(3) Death (all causes) or non-fatal myocardial infarction
(4) Refractory angina
Secondary outcomes
(1) Rehospitalization for acute coronary syndromes
(2) Complications of angiography or revascularization i.e. bleed-
ing, procedure-related myocardial infarction or stroke
Differentiating peri-PCI enzyme leaks from the outcome measure
of non-fatal myocardial infarction warrants further comment. A
universal definition of myocardial infarction, including peri-pro-
cedural myocardial infarction, has been adopted only recently and
defines peri-procedural myocardial infarction as a biomarker in-
crease to three times the upper reference limit (Thygesen 2007).
Unfortunately, as is summarized in Table 2, peri-procedural my-
ocardial infarction was variably defined in the included stud-
ies and this limited the interpretation of data across trials. The
TACTICS-TIMI 18 definition most closely matches the the cur-
rent universal definition. Further, not all included studies involved
the routine measurement of cardiac enzymes following PCI. This
point is discussed further under the heading ’Outcomes’.
Search methods for identification of studies
The databases that were searched included: Cochrane Central
Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library
2008, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1996 to February 2008) and EM-
BASE (1996 to February 2008). No language restrictions were
applied. The restriction of 1996 onwards was applied because of
low rates of stent use prior to that year. See Appendix 1 for details
of the search strategies.
Further, reference lists of retrieved articles were searched and ex-
perts in the field contacted for additional information.
Data collection and analysis
Selection of studies
Two review authors (MRH, JAD) independently selected articles
for inclusion in the review. JAD was an author on a previous version
of this review. A study was considered eligible for inclusion if it was
a prospective trial that compared the routine invasive strategy with
the conservative strategy in patients with UA/NSTEMI. Specific
exclusion criteria are mentioned in the ’Types of studies’ section
above. Data for this update were extracted by MRH using double
data entry.
Data extraction and management
Data were extracted independently by two review authors (MRH,
JAD) onto data extraction sheets. Disagreement was resolved first
by consensus and then by consultation with CNA and IAS.
5Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Quality assessment
All included studies were assessed independently by two review
authors for quality. Please refer to the table ’Characteristics of
included studies’ for quality assessment of the included studies.
The criteria used were those recommended by the Cochrane Heart
Group.
(1) Treatment assignment: was treatment assignment truly ran-
dom?
(2) Blinding: were the patients and investigators unaware of the
treatment assignment?
(3) Selection bias after treatment assignment: were all patients
signed up for the trial accounted for at trial conclusion? Were the
conclusions reached by intention-to-treat analysis?
Statistical considerations
Data were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. Where appro-
priate, data from all trials were combined using the meta-analysis
software in Review Manager. All the outcome measures of this
review were dichotomous. Data were combined using random-
effects modeling to determine a summary estimate of the relative
risk (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity
was statistically assessed using the Chi2 test (P < 0.10) for all end-
points and the I2 statistic (Higgins 2003) for selected end-points.
The I2 statistic was displayed on the forest plots for all analyses.
Further, sensitivity analysis was undertaken for various pre-spec-
ified variables that may present sources of interstudy heterogeni-
ety. Since this meta-analysis contained a small number of included
studies and we previously identified many potential sources of het-
erogeniety (Hoenig 2006), meta-regression was not undertaken.
As such we felt that an individual patient data meta-analysis would
be more appropriate (Thompson 2005). Further, it would avoid
aggregation bias. Given the differing definitions of myocardial in-
farction between the studies (Table 2), mortality at end of follow
up was used when assessing publication bias or heterogeniety via
sensitivity analysis. As stated under the heading ’Types of studies’,
all included studies were further analysed by assignment to one of
two analyses depending on the routine use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor antagonists. We compared the invasive strategy versus the
conservative strategy within each analysis.
R E S U L T S
Description of studies
See: Characteristics of included studies; Characteristics of excluded
studies.
The literature search yielded 2221 hits. From these, 31 papers
reporting on 14 studies were selected for closer attention. One
study was excluded because it was based on a registry and hence
contained observational data (MITI 2000). Another study was
excluded because it was a post hoc analysis of a trial comparing
hirudin to heparin in ACS patients (GUSTO2b 2003). Four trials
were excluded because they were undertaken in the pre-stent era or
did not encourage the routine use of stents in the invasive strategy
(MATE 1998; TIMI-3b 1995; VANQWISH 1998; Zhao 2005).
Further, some studies included patients with STEMI but did not
report outcomes separately for UA/NSTEMI (Eisenberg 2005;
MATE 1998;). As was already stated, studies from the pre-stent
era under-estimate the value of the invasive strategy and are not
relevant to current practice. Also, two studies were excluded be-
cause of inappropriate patient selection or trial design (Neumann
2003; TRUCS 2000). More details on excluded studies can be
found in the Characteristics of excluded studies table. Five studies
were deemed appropriate for inclusion and are described in the
Characteristics of included studies table. These five studies were
analysed together in Analysis 1. Two of the studies used a glyco-
protein IIb/IIIa antagonist routinely in the invasive arm (ICTUS;
TACTICS-TIMI 18). These two studies were analysed together
in the pre-specified Analysis 2 (see Types of studies). The three
remaining studies satisfied this review’s stent requirement but did
not routinely use glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists in patients ran-
domized to the invasive strategy. They were analysed together as
Analysis 3 (FRISC-II; RITA-3; VINO). This section discusses
some general design features of the included studies and comments
on the specific differences between the studies.
Design
All studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Due to the
procedural nature of the intervention, it was presumed that the
patients and treating clinicians were not blinded. However, out-
comes were able to be assessed by a blinded committee. The table
of included studies describes trial design features and includes in-
formation on intention-to treat-analysis and losses to follow up.
Populations
The included studies were heterogeneous in their patient selection
criteria. The inclusion criteria were made up of different combi-
nations of the following core criteria: chest pain, ECG changes,
increased level of cardiac markers or documented history of coro-
nary artery disease (CAD). The specific criteria for each study are
outlined in the table of included studies. Clearly, since different
criteria were used by different studies, different trials randomized
patients with different levels of risk. Elevated troponins (Antman
1996; Galvani 1997; Lindahl 1996) or ECG changes (Cannon
1997) forebode worse prognosis in UA/NSTEMI and hence trials
recruiting these patients could be expected to have higher event
rates. The VINO study randomized patients who had chest pain,
ECG changes and elevated cardiac markers; whereas in TACTIC-
6Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
TIMI 18, 27% of the trial participants had accelerating or pro-
longed chest pain with a history of CAD as the sole entry criteria.
In contrast, the entry criteria of the RITA-3 study were explicitly
aimed at intermediate risk patients. The most recent trial in the
review (ICTUS) included patients with a positive troponin and
either ischemic ECG changes or a documented history of CAD.
Interventions
In the invasive strategy, all patients were randomized to receive
angiography regardless of symptomatic status. In contrast, in the
conservative strategy, angiography was only performed in patients
with clinical or investigational evidence of ischemia. It is important
to note that angiography is a component of both strategies and
that angiography in the conservative arm did not represent a ’cross
over’ as long as it was preceded by myocardial ischemia or evidence
for CAD.
Time to interventions
Time to angiography after symptom onset may influence efficacy.
The times to angiography after randomization in the routine in-
vasive arms were: mean 6.2 hours in VINO, median 22 hours in
TACTICS-TIMI 18, median 23 hours in ICTUS, median two
days in RITA-3 and mean four days in FRISC-II. The FRISC-II
investigators cited observational data to justify delayed angiogra-
phy and postulated that a period of “plaque passivation” prior to
angiography would be beneficial. However, Neumann 2003 subse-
quently compared an ’early invasive’ (angiography within six hours
of randomization) to ’delayed invasive’ (angiography in three to
five days) strategy in UA/NSTEMI patients and found that early
angiography produced superior outcomes to delayed angiography.
More recently, the TIMACS 2008 study group compared an ’early
invasive’ (angiography within 24 hours of randomization, median
14 hours) to ’delayed invasive’ (angiography after 36 hours, me-
dian 50 hours) in UA/NSTEMI patients. The TIMACS 2008
study group showed no hazard for an early invasive strategy com-
pared to a delayed invasive strategy and also showed that in high
risk patients the early invasive strategy produced more favorable
clinical outcomes. These findings need further confirmation but
suggest that high risk patients, in particular, benefit from expe-
dited intervention. Given that the trials in this review are more
consistent with a ’delayed invasive’ strategy, it is possible that the
available data under-estimate the potential effectiveness of the in-
vasive strategy.
Criteria for ischemia
There were important differences between trials in the criteria for
ischemia that mandated angiography in the conservative arm. In
particular, the FRISC-II criteria were widely criticized for being
more stringent than those of the other studies, thereby exaggerat-
ing benefit conferred by the invasive strategy. Further, FRISC-II
did not utilize nuclear imaging or pharmacologic stress testing in
the conservative strategy. Indeed, application of the FRISC-II cri-
teria to the VANQWISH study, which recruited similar patients,
suggests that significant CAD was under-detected in the conser-
vative arm of the FRISC-II study (Goyal 2002).
Outcomes
Commonly reported outcomes included death, myocardial infarc-
tion and recurrent angina. Death was reported as all-cause death.
The definition of myocardial infarction varied between the in-
cluded studies but included a combination of chest pain, ECG
changes and elevated cardiac enzymes. Peri-PCI enzyme leaks
without other criteria were not reported as an end-point by all stud-
ies but were included as a safety outcome where data were available.
The variable definitions of myocardial infarction are summarized
in Table 2 and show that some of the studies required clinical or
ECG, or both, changes for the myocardial infarction end-points
whereas others only required an increased cardiac marker. Impor-
tantly, the ICTUS trial protocol mandated the routine measure-
ment of CK-MB after PCI and this constituted the end-point of
myocardial infarction. The significance of peri-PCI enzyme leaks
is a subject of considerable debate (Bhatt 2005; Cutlip 2005). The
other trials in this review did not specify the routine measurement
of CK-MB after PCI per protocol. Fortunately the ICTUS inves-
tigators reported ’spontaneous’ and ’peri-procedural’ myocardial
infarction as separate end-points (de Winter 2005; Hirsch 2007;
Windhausen 2007b). Extracting data from ICTUS, which com-
bined spontaneous and procedural myocardial infarction into a
single myocardial infarction end-point, caused significant hetero-
geniety in a previous version of this meta-analysis (Hoenig 2006).
Hence, to maximize consistency between trials, in our analysis
we analysed ’spontaneous’ myocardial infarction from the ICTUS
trial with our myocardial infarction end-point and reported peri-
procedural myocardial infarction as a safety end-point. This not
only minimized heterogeniety in meta-analysis but is also justi-
fiable since the significance of peri-procedural biomarker leaks is
still a subject of contention. Fortunately, end-points such as death
are indisputable. Follow up was six months in TACTICS-TIMI
18 and VINO, three years for myocardial infarction but four years
for mortality in ICTUS, five years in FRISC-II and five years in
RITA-3. Characteristics of the included studies are summarized
in the table ’Characteristics of included studies’ and in Table 1.
Risk of bias in included studies
The methodological quality of the included studies is summarized
in the table ’Characteristics of included studies’.
Effects of interventions
7Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
The baseline patient characteristics were equivalent between the
two randomized groups of all the included studies. TACTICS-
TIMI 18 and ICTUS were analysed together in Analysis 2 since
they involved the routine use of both glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor
antagonists and stents. Analysis 3 included studies that used only
stenting routinely and included RITA-3, FRISC-II and VINO.
Since the included studies reported outcomes after different dura-
tions of follow up, end-points for meta-analysis were categorized
as being index, early, intermediate or late. ’Index’ end-points indi-
cate follow up during the initial hospitalization. ’Early’ end-points
indicate a follow up less than or equal to four months. ’Interme-
diate’ end-points indicate a follow up greater than or equal to six
months, or less than or equal to 12 months. ’Late’ end-points in-
dicate a follow up greater than or equal to two years. In studies
that supplied end-points at various time points in a given category,
the latest follow up outcomes were used. For example, if outcomes
were provided at six and 12 months follow up, the 12-month data
were used in the analysis.
Analysis 1: all studies undertaken in the stent era
regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist
use (TACTICS-TIMI 18, ICTUS, RITA-3, FRISC-II,
VINO)
Death (index, early, intermediate, late)
Index death showed a trend to hazard with the early invasive strat-
egy, having a RR of 1.53 (95% CI 0.98 to 2.39). Early and inter-
mediate death were not improved by an invasive strategy and nei-
ther was late death, which included data from FRISC-II (5 years),
RITA-3 (5 years) and ICTUS (4 years) (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.76
to 1.08). Significant heterogeneity (P = 0.09) was detected in the
analysis of intermediate death, which was the only analysis that
included data from all five included studies. The I2 statistic for
the intermediate death analysis was 51% which indicated that the
finding of heterogeneity cannot be assumed to be due to chance.
Some of the heterogeneity at the intermediate (six to 12-month)
time point may be explained by differences between trials in death
rates standardized to years of study duration, shown in Table 1.
The rates were 1.9% to 2.8% per year for RITA-3, FRISC-II and
ICTUS; whereas TACTICS-TIMI 18 had a rate of 7% and VINO
a rate of 27%. For the most part, the levels of risk were concordant
with the inclusion criteria of the studies, as described in the table
of included studies. with the exception of ICTUS. As already dis-
cussed, mortality increases as troponin concentrations increase in
patients with ACS (Antman 1996). The ICTUS trial exclusively
enrolled patients with a TnT > 0.03 ng/ml and hence may be ex-
pected to have a higher mortality rate. Indeed, in TACTICS-TIMI
18 the six-month mortality rate for patients with a TnT > 0.01
ng/ml was 4% (Morrow 2001). Since the ICTUS trial recruited
patients with TnT > 0.03 ng/ml and had a longer duration of
12-months, the standardized mortality would be expected to be >
4%. Indeed, in FRISC-II patients with TnT > 0.03 ng/ml had a
12-month mortality rate of 4.2% (Diderholm 2002). Hence the
ICTUS participants appear to have a lower than expected event
rate based on event rates from other trials. Differences between
trials in baseline medical therapy do not appear to explain why
participants in the ICTUS trial had a lower mortality than other
trials, particularly when comparing high rates of background med-
ical therapy seen in both ICTUS and TACTICS-TIMI 18. This
observation highlights the importance of global risk stratification
over the selection of a single high risk characteristic in predicting
risk of future events.
Long term (two to five-year) follow up can be seen by the mortality
rates at end of follow up, described in Table 1. The studies with the
highest mortality at end of follow up were those that randomized
the highest risk patients (VINO) and those that had the longest
follow up (for example RITA-3 compared to TACTICS-TIMI
18). It may be inappropriate to simply consider outcomes at one
time point, for example at end of follow up as meta-analyses of this
topic have done (Choudhry 2005; Mehta 2005), since it may be
only on long term follow up that mortality curves diverge. Further,
absolute risk reductions and numbers needed to treat (NNT) are
meaningless from such analyses unless studies are homogenous for
duration of follow up and risk level of participants. Clearly, long
term studies or those enrolling higher risk participants will have a
smaller NNT compared to those of shorter duration or involving
lower risk patients. Further, long term follow up may be required
to show a benefit for intervention since the mortality benefit of
CABG over medical therapy for stable angina only emerges after
three years and following an early hazard for surgery (Yusuf 1994).
The aggregate number of patients followed up for late mortality
was probably inadequate to make firm conclusions and this issue
of sample size power is explored further in the discussion.
Myocardial infarction (index, early, intermediate, late)
Index myocardial infarction was not significantly affected by an
invasive strategy, although significant heterogeneity was found
at this time point (P < 0.01). Possible reasons for this finding
include the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists in
TACTICS-TIMI 18 and the definition of myocardial infarction
used by the VINO investigators, which excluded any events in the
first 72 hours of randomization (Table 2). Early myocardial infarc-
tion was not significantly decreased by an early invasive strategy.
Intermediate myocardial infarction included data from all the in-
cluded studies as assessed at either six or 12 months. An early in-
vasive strategy significantly reduced rates of myocardial infarction
(RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.86). If the trial-preferred definition of
myocardial infarction for ICTUS data was utilized instead (Table
2) there would have been no benefit for the early invasive strat-
egy, with significant heterogeneity (P = 0.02, I2 = 66%). In light
of the controversy regarding peri-PCI enzyme leaks, we have ex-
8Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
tracted ’spontaneous’ myocardial infarction from the ICTUS to al-
low comparability with other trials. Also, as mentioned previously,
ICTUS was the only study that routinely measured biomarkers
in all patients peri-procedurally. Late myocardial infarction based
on FRISC-II (five years), RITA-3 (five years) and ICTUS (three
years) was similarly, significantly decreased by the invasive strategy
(RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.92).
Death or non-fatal myocardial infarction (index, early,
intermediate, late)
The ICTUS investigators did not report the end-point of death or
(spontaneous) myocardial infacrtion at index one year but reported
it at three years. Index death or non-fatal myocardial infarction was
not decreased by an early invasive strategy; significant heterogene-
ity was found and possible reasons include those already discussed
for components of the composite outcome. Early death or non-
fatal myocardial infarction, based on 30-day TACTICS-TIMI 18
data and VINO data, was significantly decreased by an invasive
strategy with a RR of 0.64 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.92). Intermedi-
ate death or non-fatal myocardial infarction was significantly de-
creased with an early invasive strategy and included data from all
included studies except for ICTUS (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62 to
0.94). No significant heterogeneity was found. Late death or non-
fatal myocardial infarction was not significantly decreased (RR
0.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.08). The late follow up for this composite
end-point was perhaps less important given the indendent benefit
observed for the myocardial infarction end-point at late follow up
and the ’dilution’ of this effect by the incorporation of mortality
into a composite outcome.
Combining data for subgroup analysis was not possible because
TACTICS-TIMI 18 dichotomized patients at TnT = 0.01 ng/ml
and TnI = 0.1 ng/ml, whereas FRISC-II presented data based on
TnT levels of 0.1 ng/ml or 0.3 ng/ml. Gender subanalysis for inter-
mediate death or non-fatal myocardial infarction showed that the
benefit of the invasive strategy only reached statistical significance
in males (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.81). Interestingly, the data
for women showed significant heterogeneity between the three
studies (P = 0.05). No such heterogeneity was noted in the male
data. This might be driven by FRISC-II data where women in the
conservative group had significantly better outcomes than men in
the conservative group (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.75). However,
the CI in the female subgroup was wide and overlapped that of
their male counterparts. This is likely due to the small number of
females in the included studies. Late (five-year) follow up from the
FRISC-II investigators also showed that the invasive strategy only
significantly benefitted males (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.86).
These subgroup analyses need to be interpreted with caution and
are further explored in the discussion.
Refractory angina (early, intermediate)
An invasive strategy decreased early refractory angina based on
four-month data from RITA-3 (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.68).
Intermediate refractory angina was significantly decreased by an
early invasive strategy with a RR of 0.67 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.83)
although significant heterogeneity (P < 0.01) was found at this
time point, driven by the results of ICTUS. The null effect on this
end-point found in ICTUS was surprising given that this study
recruited only troponin-positive participants. Indeed, a retrospec-
tive analysis of troponin-positive patients from TACTIC-TIMI
18 showed that 94% of troponin-positive patients had significant
angiographic CAD, 79% of which were revascularized (PCI or
CABG) at index hospitalization (Dokainish 2005). Hence the trial
participants in ICTUS would be expected to have high rates of
angiographic CAD and would be expected to show considerable
symptomatic improvement with an invasive strategy. A possible
explanation for this difference in outcomes is that 20% of patients
enrolled in ICTUS had PCI or CABG prior to randomization,
indicating good baseline control of symptomatic angina.
Rehospitalization (early, intermediate, late)
The invasive strategy was associated with an early RR of 0.60
(95% CI 0.41 to 0.88) and an intermediate RR of 0.67 (95% CI
0.61 to 0.74). Late follow up on rehospitalization was provided by
ICTUS at three years and showed that this benefit did not persist
at three years (RR 0.79 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.12). This attenuation of
the early benefit was not surprising considering the narrowing in
the difference in revascularization rates between the two strategies
in ICTUS, from 36% at initial hospitalization to 23% at end of
follow up.
Analysis 2: routine use of both stents and
glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists (TACTICS-
TIMI 18, ICTUS)
This analysis included trials that were as close as possible to an
’ideal’ invasive strategy, that is a strategy that involved the routine
use of both glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists and stents.
Death (index, early, intermediate, late)
There was no difference between the treatment strategies at
any of the time points assessed. Data from TACTICS-TIMI
18 and ICTUS at hospitalization (for index death) and from
TACTICS-TIMI 18 at 30 days (for early death) showed a trend
toward increased index death and early death (at 30 days) in the
invasive arm but this did not reach statistical significance. Inter-
mediate death was not different between the treatment strategies
when six-month data from TACTICS-TIMI 18 and 12-month
data from ICTUS were combined. In TACTIC-TIMI 18, the risk
of death was not reduced by an early invasive strategy even in
higher risk patients with TnI levels > 0.1 ng/ml. Late follow up
9Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
from ICTUS (four years) showed no benefit of an early invasive
strategy on the death end-point at late follow up.
Myocardial infarction (index, early, intermediate, late)
Based on TACTICS-TIMI 18 and ICTUS data, the invasive strat-
egy showed a trend toward a decrease in myocardial infarction
during the Index hospitalization. Hence, there did not appear to
be an early hazard to an invasive strategy when glycoprotein IIb/
IIIa receptor antagonists were used upstream of PCI. Early my-
ocardial infarction was reduced by an invasive strategy based on
TACTICS-TIMI 18 data at 30 days (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.35 to
0.79). Intermediate myocardial infarction was decreased by an in-
vasive strategy using data for spontaneous myocardial infarction
from ICTUS and data from TACTICS-TIMI 18 (RR 0.73, 95%
CI 0.55 to 0.98). This finding became insignificant and signifi-
cant heterogeneity resulted if the preferred definition of myocar-
dial infarction by the ICTUS investigators was utilized (Table 2).
As already discussed, the TACTICS-TIMI 18 investigators did
not routinely measure CK-MB post-PCI (Table 2). Late follow
up from ICTUS (three years) showed no benefit of an early inva-
sive strategy on the rate of spontaneous myocardial infarction. In
contrast to RITA-3 and FRISC-II, ICTUS was the only trial that
included contemporary medical management (Table 1).
Death or myocardial infarction (index, early, intermediate,
late)
Data for this end-point at index, early and intermediate time points
were only available from TACTICS-TIMI 18. At index there was
no difference between the treatment strategies. The invasive strat-
egy was associated with an early (30-day) RR of 0.67 (95% CI
0.48 to 0.94). Baseline troponin levels were available from 1826
of 2220 trial participants and this data formed the basis for the
pre-specified subgroup analysis based on TnT levels greater than
(troponin positive) or less than (troponin negative) 0.01 ng/ml.
Subgroup analysis showed that the early (30-day) benefit of the
invasive strategy only reached statistical significance in troponin-
positive patients (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.79). Troponin-neg-
ative patients did not show significant benefit at 30-days follow up
(RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.06) although this CI overlapped with
those of troponin-positive patients. In contrast, at intermediate
(six-month) follow up, the invasive strategy did not show any ben-
efit regardless of baseline TnT status or gender. The results of this
subgroup analysis changed when the TACTICS-TIMI 18 investi-
gators used a different cardiac biomarker. With subgroup analysis
based on a TnI cut-off of 0.1 ng/ml, troponin-positive patients
showed early (30-day) and intermediate (six-month) benefits of an
invasive strategy with RR of 0.47 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.73) and RR of
0.67 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.96) respectively. Such subgroup analysis
based on troponin was pre-specified by the TACTICS-TIMI 18
investigators but should nevertheless be interpreted with caution.
The ICTUS trial suggested no benefit of an early invasive strategy
at late follow up regardless of baseline risk; this is explored further
in the discussion.
Analysis 3: routine stent use but no routine
glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use (RITA-3,
FRISC-II, VINO)
Death (index, early, intermediate, late)
There was a non-significant trend to increased death at index hos-
pitalization and no effect on early death in the invasive strategy
group. Intermediate death at six to 12 months was not significantly
improved by an invasive strategy and significant heterogeneity was
noted (P = 0.02). This may have been driven by the stringent cri-
teria set by the FRISC-II group to define failure of conservative
therapy; and by the large benefit of an invasive strategy observed in
the small VINO study, which randomized patients with the high-
est death rates of all the included studies (Table 1). The FRISC-II
investigators undertook subgroup analysis based on the presence
of TnT greater than or less than 0.03 ng/ml and the presence of
ST depression on the admission ECG. Mortality assessed at one
year was not affected by an invasive strategy in this retrospective
analysis, even in the group of patients with both TnT > 0.03 ng/
ml and ST depression, although the numbers of patients may be
too small to detect a difference. Follow up for late death was only
provided by FRISC-II and RITA-3 at five years and was not sig-
nificantly improved by an invasive strategy.
Myocardial infarction (index, early, intermediate, late)
There were no differences in index myocardial infarction rates be-
tween the two strategies although significant heterogeneity was
found (P = 0.07). The FRISC-II data show a significant hazard
for this end-point in the early invasive group (RR 2.22, 95%
CI 1.46 to 3.36). Importantly, the three studies in this analysis
did not undertake routine enzyme measurements post-PCI, as the
ICTUS trial did, and used clinical symptoms as a diagnostic crite-
rion (Table 2). Significant heterogeneity may be due to the VINO
definition of myocardial infarction which excluded events within
72 hours of randomization in calculating this end-point. A hazard
of the invasive strategy at index hospitalization would be expected,
especially as these trials did not employ routine glycoprotein IIb/
IIIa receptor antagonist use with PCI. Early myocardial infarc-
tion, based on 30-day VINO data and four-month RITA-3 data,
was not significantly altered by an early invasive strategy. Inter-
mediate (six-month data from VINO and 12-month data from
FRISC-II and RITA-3) and late myocardial infarction (five-year
FRISC-II and RITA-3 data) were significantly decreased by the
invasive strategy (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.98; RR 0.75, 95%
CI 0.63 to 0.90 respectively).
10Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Death or myocardial Infarction (index, early, intermediate,
late)
The invasive strategy was associated with a trend to increased death
or non-fatal myocardial infarction at index hospitalization. Sig-
nificant heterogeneity (P = 0.06) was found, with FRISC-II data
showing a significant hazard of the invasive strategy (RR 2.07,
95% CI 1.42 to 3.03). This trend to hazard may be related to the
absence of adjunct glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
with PCI. Early death or non-fatal myocardial infarction based on
VINO 30-day data did not show a significant benefit with the in-
vasive strategy. Intermediate death or non-fatal myocardial infarc-
tion also did not show a significant benefit of an invasive strategy,
although significant heterogeneity was found (P = 0.09) driven
by results of the small VINO trial favoring the invasive strategy.
Although the VINO trial was small, the participants of this trial
had the highest mortality rates (Table 1) and hence it was possible
that these patients had the most to gain from an invasive strategy.
Late death or non-fatal myocardial infarction, based on five-year
results from FRISC-II and RITA-3 showed a significant benefit of
this composite outcome with the invasive strategy (RR 0.81, 95%
CI 0.72 to 0.92).
The FRISC-II data showed that the benefit of the invasive strategy
in the end-point of intermediate (six to 12-month) death or non-
fatal myocardial infarction was only significant in patients with
ST depression at entry. The RR for this end-point was 0.66 (95%
CI 0.50 to 0.88) at six and 12 months for patients who had ST
depression. There was no benefit from a routine invasive strat-
egy in patients without ST depression although such retrospective
subgroup analysis needs to be interpreted with caution. Further,
the FRISC-II troponin subgroup analysis found that troponin-
positive participants (TnT > 0.1 ng/ml) had a RR of 0.71 (95%
CI 0.53 to 0.93) at 12 months whereas participants with TnT <
0.1 ng/ml had only a trend for benefit with a RR of 0.77 (95%
CI 0.53 to 1.11). Again, the CIs of these subgroup analyses over-
lap and the results should be regarded with caution. In a separate
report, the FRISC-II investigators undertook subgroup analysis
based on the presence of TnT greater than or less than 0.03 ng/
ml and the presence of ST depression on admission ECG. The
intermediate (one-year) death or non-fatal myocardial infarction
end-point was only decreased significantly in the group of patients
with both TnT > 0.03 ng/ml and ST depression > 0.1 mV (RR
0.60, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82). Likewise, the FRISC-II investigators
stratified patients by FRISC score when reporting late (five-year)
outcomes for this end-point. These findings are explored in the
discussion.
Safety end-points
Procedure-related myocardial infarction
Data from FRISC-II, RITA-3 and ICTUS showed that the inva-
sive strategy was associated with an increased risk of procedure-
related myocardial infarction (RR 2.00, 95% confidence interval
1.53 to 2.61). No heterogeneity was found despite the different
diagnostic criteria: routine measurement of CK-MB post-PCI in
ICTUS; FRISC-II and RITA-3 included clinical or ECG criteria
in the definition of this end-point (Table 2). As already discussed,
the significance of peri-procedural cardiac biomarker leaks is the
subject of considerable ongoing debate but can be modified by
background medications, including use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor antagonists (Cutlip 2005). While patients subjected to
an invasive strategy in these trials had increased procedure-related
myocardial infarction, this did not translate into an increased long-
term mortality.
Bleeding
The invasive strategy was associated with an increased risk of bleed-
ing (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.31). Bleeding definitions varied
between protocols; however, the excess bleeding was consistently
due to minor bleeding associated with arterial access and wound
site bleeding. Bleeding occurred in approximately 8% of patients
in the invasive arm compared to 5% of patients in the conservative
arm. The ICTUS investigators reported major bleeding which was
defined as: fatal bleeding, intracranial bleeding, need for trans-
fusion, a decrease in hemoglobin by 4.8 g/dl or bleeding caus-
ing hemodynamic compromise. Major bleeding occurred in 3.1%
and 1.7% (p = NS) of patients randomized to an invasive and
conservative strategy respectively during the initial hospitalization
period. On four-year follow up, mortality was 18·6% in the 29
patients with major bleeding during initial hospitalization com-
pared with 7·5% in the 1171 patients without in-hospital major
bleeding (RR 2.68, 95% CI 1.08 to 6.61). Further data from ran-
domized controlled trials are required regarding the risk of major
bleeding (which is frequently defined differently) with an invasive
strategy since numerous studies in UA/NSTEMI have identified
major bleeding as a harbinger of a poor prognosis.
Stroke
Data from ICTUS and TACTICS-TIMI 18 showed no hazard for
stroke with an early invasive strategy.
Contrast reactions
Allergic reactions due to the contrast used in angiography were
more common in the invasive strategy than the conservative strat-
egy. Typically, 1% of patients assigned to an invasive strategy de-
veloped contrast allergy. The rate in the conservative strategy de-
pended on the proportion that underwent subsequent angiogra-
phy and this depended on the population risk level. Contrast-in-
duced renal failure was not reported, however this outcome can be
modified by the patient’s baseline renal function, hydration status
and sodium bicarbonate.
11Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Sensitivity analysis
Changing the methods for analysis from random-effects modeling
to a fixed-effect model altered the interpretation of the data. The
early myocardial infarction end-point and the late death or non-
fatal myocardial infarction in Analysis 1 showed a significant ben-
efit with an invasive strategy. However, random-effects modeling
was chosen for the final presentation of the results as it provides a
more conservative estimate of effect size in the presence of a small
number of included studies and variable risk levels of randomized
participants. Table 1 highlights important differences between the
included studies which guided the choice of sensitivity analysis
based on exclusion of certain studies. Recurrent angina and rehos-
pitalization are end-points that were not subjected to sensitivity
analysis because relative risk (RR) estimates were the most con-
sistent and robust findings of this meta-analysis and, in general,
were not associated with significant heterogeneity. The myocar-
dial infarction end-point was not subjected to sensitivity analysis
because of the variable definitions used in the included studies
and the small numbers of trials. Consequently, the analyses below
relate to the mortality end-point only.
Time to angiography
As previously discussed, time to angiography in the invasive arm
may influence outcomes. Indeed, Neumann et al showed that in
patients with UANSTEMI, a ’delayed invasive’ strategy with an-
giography three to five days post-randomization had a relative risk
of death or non-fatal myocardial infarction which was roughly two
fold that observed in patients with an ’early invasive’ strategy where
angiography was performed within six hours of randomization.
The excess events in the late invasive arm occurred prior to an-
giography; this was observed despite background anti-thrombotic
therapy which included aspirin, clopidogrel, tirofiban and hep-
arin. Notably, this study randomized a high risk population with
roughly two thirds of the participants having a positive troponin
and ST depression on ECG (Neumann 2003). Times to angiogra-
phy in the included trials are shown in the table of included studies
and can be grouped as ’early invasive’ strategy versus ’delayed inva-
sive’ strategy. ICTUS, TACTICS-TIMI 18 and VINO generally
employed angiography within 24 hours of randomization whereas
the delay in FRISC-II and RITA-3 was typically greater than two
days. Sensitivity analysis based on this study categorization did
not yield results different from the previously reported findings of
this review.
Mortality rates In the conservative arm
The mortality rates of the included studies are described in Table 1
as the mortality rate in the conservative arm divided by the number
of years of follow up. ICTUS, FRISC-II and RITA-3 had mortality
rates 1.9% to 2.8% per year of follow up while TACTICS-TIMI
18 had a rate of 7% and VINO a rate of 27%. Hence, the data
for ICTUS, FRISC-II and RITA-3 were analysed separately, as
were data for TACTICS-TIMI 18 and VINO. When the high-
mortality rate studies and low-mortality rate studies were analysed
separately, the previously reported findings of the review were not
altered.
Percentage of trial participants with a positive troponin
Findings on subgroup analysis suggested that a positive troponin
may identify high risk patients who may show particular benefit
with an early invasive strategy. While VINO and ICTUS only
recruited participants with positive cardiac biomarkers, the per-
centage of biomarker-positive patients in FRISC-II, RITA-3 and
TACTICS-TIMI 18 ranged between 50% and 75% (Table 1). The
studies that only randomized biomarker-positive patients (VINO
and ICTUS) were analysed separately and showed a null effect
on intermediate mortality. When the studies that did not specify
cardiac biomarker status as an inclusion criterion were analysed
separately, there was a significant increase in index death in the
invasive arm (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.82). This finding high-
lights potential hazards of an early invasive strategy and the im-
portance of risk stratification to select high risk patients who may
have meaningful benefits that outweigh the harms.
CABG as a mode of revascularization in the invasive arm
Data from trials of coronary revascularization in patients with sta-
ble CAD suggest that CABG may be the preferred mode of revas-
cularization in higher risk patients with multi-vessel disease (Rihal
2003) and reduce death over long term follow up (Yusuf 1994).
This statement should be in the background. Rates of CABG as
mode of revascularization in the invasive arms of the included
studies are described in Table 1. ICTUS and TACTICS-TIMI
18 had rates of approximately 20% while RITA-3, FRISC-II and
VINO had rates of approximately 40%. Performing a sensitivity
analysis on the basis of high or low rates of CABG in the invasive
arm used the same data as already used in Analysis 2 and Analysis
3 and hence the findings were identical to those already described.
Difference in revascularization rates between the treatment
arms
The absolute percentage difference in revascularization rates be-
tween the invasive and conservative arms of each trial is described
in Table 1. FRISC-II and VINO had higher absolute differences
in revascularization rates (28% to 39%) compared to the other in-
cluded trials (17% to 23%). When the former trials were pooled,
a significant reduction in intermediate death was noted (RR 0.49,
95% CI 0.25 to 0.95). This suggests that as the difference in rates
of revascularization between invasive and conservative arms nar-
rows, the benefit of a routine invasive strategy may diminish.
12Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
D I S C U S S I O N
Summary of findings
In the all-study combined analysis, index death (during initial hos-
pitalization) showed a trend to hazard with an invasive strategy
with a RR of 1.59 (95% CI 0.96 to 2.64). Early death (< four
months), intermediate death (six to 12 months) and late death
(four to five years) were not significantly improved with an invasive
strategy. Significant heterogeneity was found in this analysis pos-
sibly driven by the different levels of risk, different rates of back-
ground medical therapies and different criteria for ischemia in the
included studies. Index myocardial infarction was not significantly
improved with an early invasive strategy; significant heterogeneity
was found on combining the data.
Myocardial infarction data at index hospitalization from trials that
routinely used glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists showed
a trend to benefit of the early invasive strategy, with a relative risk
ratio of 0.67 (95% CI 0.44 to 1.02). Early myocardial infarction
rates tended to be reduced with an early invasive approach; inter-
mediate and late myocardial infarction were significantly reduced
with an early invasive strategy with RR of 0.73 (95% CI 0.62 to
0.86) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.92) respectively. The studies
that reported the death or myocardial infarction end-point suggest
that benefits of an early invasive strategy were significant only in
trial participants with high risk characteristics, that is positive tro-
ponin or ST depression on admission ECG, although this was not
observed in the most contemporary study. These markers of risk
may have identified populations with higher event rates and hence
enhanced power to detect a difference between the two strategies.
The CIs between subgroups overlapped and these findings from
post hoc analyses should be interpreted with appropriate caution.
Early and intermediate refractory angina were both significantly
decreased with an early invasive strategy; early RR 0.47 (95% CI
0.32 to 0.68) and intermediate RR 0.67 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.83).
Early and intermediate rehospitalization were both significantly
decreased with an early invasive strategy; early RR 0.60 (95% CI
0.41 to 0.88) and intermediate RR 0.67 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.74).
However, in the most recent trial, the difference in hospitalization
was not sustained at three years and this is perhaps explained by
the narrowing difference in revascularization rates between the two
strategies over time. The loss of symptomatic benefit associated
with early intervention is also lost over time in patients with stable
coronary disease (COURAGE 2007).
With regard to safety end-points, the invasive strategy was associ-
ated with a two-fold increase in the RR of the variably defined pro-
cedural myocardial infarction end-point and a 1.7 fold increase in
the RR of bleeding, but no increase in RR of stroke. The excess in
bleeding was mainly due to wound site bleeding but was difficult
to grade due to inter-trial differences in definition and reporting
of data.
Discussion of findings on subgroup analysis
Troponin status of patients
Troponin status of the patients serves as an important tool for risk
stratification. Of the included studies, only TACTICS-TIMI 18
had the pre-specified intention of testing the ’troponin hypothe-
sis’, that is to test whether benefit from an invasive strategy was
limited to troponin-positive patients. Data for the death or non-
fatal myocardial infarction end-point from TACTICS-TIMI 18
and FRISC-II suggest that only high risk patients with a posi-
tive troponin benefited from an early invasive strategy with re-
spect to this end-point. However, the CI for this subgroup anal-
ysis showed overlap with that of troponin-negative patients. Data
from VINO, which only enrolled patients with clinical symptoms,
ECG changes and positive cardiac biomarkers, showed a signifi-
cant 72% relative risk reduction in this end-point at six months.
However, the ICTUS trial which also exclusively enrolled tro-
ponin-positive patients had an unexpectedly low baseline mortal-
ity rate when compared to other included studies (Table 1). This
may be partly due to optimal medical therapy in the ICTUS trial
compared to other trials wherein, in both arms, early use of clopi-
dogrel and intensive lipid-lowering therapy was recommended to
treating clinicians. Disparate event rates in patients with positive
troponin highlights the importance of global risk stratification as
opposed to using cardiac biomarkers as a single risk index. Indeed,
in retrospective analysis of the FRISC-II data (Diderholm 2002),
death or non-fatal myocardial infarction showed a significant 40%
relative risk reduction only in patients with both TnT > 0.03 ng/
ml and ST depression on the admission ECG. Hence, although
ICTUS participants all had a TnT > 0.03 ng/ml, this sole criterion
did not necessarily identify a risk level that may be benefited by
an invasive strategy.
A retrospective analysis by the TACTICS-TIMI 18 investigators
highlights the limitations of purely using a positive troponin to
predict event rates. An analysis of the invasive arm showed that
6% of the patients who had a positive troponin test did not have
significant angiographic CAD as defined by a > 50% stenosis of
any coronary artery (Dokainish 2005). At six months, these pa-
tients had a 3.1% rate of death or re-infarction compared to 0%
for those with a negative troponin and no angiographic CAD. As
would be expected, troponin-positive patients with angiographic
CAD had a high 8.6% rate of death or re-infarction at six months.
Interestingly, patients with angiographic CAD who had a neg-
ative troponin had a 5.8% rate of death or re-infarction at six
months, which is clearly higher than that for troponin-positive
patients without angiographic CAD. Hence, troponin alone can-
not be used to risk stratify patients and this analysis highlights the
limitations of angiography in the assessment of plaque burden.
In general, in unstable angina studies a positive troponin status
has been shown to correlate with complex coronary lesions on an-
giography and reduced coronary flow (Benamer 1999; Heeschen
13Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
1999a; Hochman 1999) but should not be used alone to identify
a high risk population. However, absolute values of troponin show
a linear relation with subsequent risk of coronary events; troponin
positivity has also been shown to predict benefit from glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists (Hamm 1999; Heeschen 1999b) and
remains a critical element of risk stratification.
ST depression on admission
As previously mentioned, ECG changes on admission forebode
a worse prognosis in UA/NSTEMI. Indeed, data from the TIMI
III registry show that patients with ST depression on the admis-
sion ECG have a 2.5 fold increase in risk of death or myocar-
dial infarction at one year (Cannon 1997). In the ICTUS and
TACTICS-TIMI 18 trials, ST depression was an independent pre-
dictor for failure of medical therapy in the conservative strategy
(Sabatine 2006; Windhausen 2007b). As discussed above, post-
hoc analysis of FRISC-II data showed that the benefit of an early
invasive strategy on the end-point of death or non-fatal myocar-
dial infarction only reached statistical significance in patients with
ST depression on the admission ECG. In FRISC-II and the TIMI
III registry, the prevalence of triple vessel or left main artery dis-
ease was approximately 50% and 66%, respectively, in patients
who had ST depression on the admission ECG. Similarly, the
TACTICS-TIMI 18 study reported an odds ratio for three vessel
disease of 1.79 in participants with ST deviation of 0.05 to 0.09
mV, and an odds ratio of 1.91 in those with ST deviation > 0.10
mv compared to those with ST deviation < 0.05 mV. Hence, the
ECG can be used as a tool to identify patients that are likely to
benefit from revascularization. An analysis of the FRISC-II data
showed that ST depression was still a predictor of benefit from
an invasive strategy even after baseline differences were accounted
for (Holmvang 2003). Further, this analysis also suggested that
the benefits of the invasive strategy were further amplified with
increasing amplitude of ST depression in an increasing number of
ECG leads.
Data from TACTICS-TIMI 18 confirms the utility of ST seg-
ment changes in identifying a higher risk population that may
benefit from an invasive strategy. Unfortunately, data could not
be obtained for the end-point of death or non-fatal myocardial
infarction but the study includes data for the end-point of death
or non-fatal myocardial infarction or rehospitalization for ACS.
Using this end-point, the RR was 0.62 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.74)
in participants with baseline ST changes while a null effect was
observed in those without such changes. The ICTUS data show a
trend to decreased rates of (spontaneous) myocardial infarction at
one year in those randomized to an early invasive strategy; relative
risk ratio of 0.74 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.38). However, the events
were few and CIs wide. The percentage of trial participants with
ST depression on index ECG is described in Table 1; however
data for subgroup analysis were not provided in all the included
studies. While subgroup analyses of ST depression and troponin
status may identify populations with increased risk and hence an
increased power to detect statistical significance, such post hoc
analyses should be interpreted with caution.
Gender
There were disparate findings between Analysis 2 and Analysis 3
on the impact of gender on outcomes. TACTICS-TIMI 18 found
no significant interaction between gender and outcomes based on
treatment strategy. This was contrary to the findings of Analysis 3
which showed that benefit from the invasive strategy only reached
statistical significance in males. In the combined analysis (Analysis
1), gender subanalysis for intermediate death or non-fatal myocar-
dial infarction showed that the benefit of the invasive strategy was
confined to males who showed a significant 32% RR reduction.
However, the number of women in the included studies was small
and this decreased power to detect benefit from an invasive strategy
is highlighted by the wide CIs. Women with UA/NSTEMI differ
from men with the condition and this warrants further discussion.
In the included studies women exhibited less severe coronary artery
disease and were less likely to have elevated troponin when com-
pared to men (Clayton 2004; Glaser 2002; Lagerqvist 2001). Fur-
ther, in FRISC-II and RITA-3 women in the conservative arm had
a better prognosis than men in the conservative arm. There is no a
priori reason why the finding of a significant 2.1 fold RR of peri-
procedural myocardial infarction in the invasive arm would not
also apply to women despite their less extensive CAD on angiog-
raphy. However, no such hazard was observed in TACTICS-TIMI
18, possibly because tirofiban was used upstream of invasive pro-
cedures. A retrospective analysis of TACTICS-TIMI 18 data sug-
gests that, after adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics,
the benefits of an early invasive strategy in women were the same
as those seen in men (Glaser 2002). In contrast, similar analyses
undertaken by FRISC-II and RITA-3 investigators did not show
a benefit for the invasive strategy in women even after adjustment
for baseline characteristics. The RITA-3 analysis suggested that
women had better outcomes than men when managed conserva-
tively and did not benefit from an invasive strategy even when
women with high risk features were analysed separately (Clayton
2004). Women in TACTICS-TIMI 18 and RITA-3 were less likely
than men to undergo CABG, even when adjusted for the pres-
ence of three vessel disease or left anterior descending artery dis-
ease (Clayton 2004; Glaser 2002). Notably in FRISC-II where the
rates of CABG were similar in both men and women, the one-
year mortality rate in patients undergoing CABG was 9.9% in
women compared to 1.2% in men (Lagerqvist 2001). Higher op-
erative CABG mortality has been observed in women enrolled in
observational studies and this discrepancy could not be accounted
for by age, co-morbidities or smaller body surface area (Blankstein
2005). The retrospective analyses from the included studies should
be interpreted with appropriate caution. They highlight the im-
portance of further research into this topic and the importance of
14Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
risk stratification, especially in women who are less likely to have
angiographic CAD when compared to their male counterparts.
Other subgroups
Other subgroups of interest that were not prespecified by our pro-
tocol are discussed as a narrative review in this section. The elderly
(aged > 65 years) comprise the majority of hospital admissions for
UA/NSTEMI. Given that the elderly have a higher risk of recur-
rent events than their younger counterparts, this increased absolute
risk may translate into a greater absolute risk reduction with an in-
vasive strategy compared to a conservative strategy (Bach 2004). A
retrospective analysis of the TACTICS-TIMI 18 trial showed that
those aged > 65 years were more likely to have high risk features
such as elevated troponins, ST deviation, diabetes and congestive
heart failure (Bach 2004). Indeed, 90% of those aged > 65 years
had intermediate to high risk TIMI scores (score ≥ 3) while 63%
of those aged < 65 years had intermediate to high risk TIMI scores.
The early invasivse strategy reduced early and intermediate death
or myocardial infarction, with relative risk ratios of 0.58 (95% CI
0.37 to 0.92) and 0.64 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.93) respectively. The
invasive strategy did not significantly benefit those aged < 65 years
although the CIs were wide and overlapped. The benefits of the
invasive strategy were also highly statistically significant in those
aged > 75 years. However, major bleeding was increased with the
invasive strategy in those aged > 65 years (RR of 1.74, 95% CI
1.12 to 2.70) while no such hazard was observed in those aged <
65 years.
Reassuringly, stroke was not increased with an invasive strategy
in the elderly, showing a trend to decreased events with an early
invasive strategy. The results of this type of analysis are hardly
surprising given that the elderly are at increased risk of events and,
therefore, a retrospective analysis will have greater power to find
benefit for an intervention with absolute event rates.
The FRISC-II investigators also published relative risk estimates
for patients aged greater than or less than 65 years and while the
risk estimate was only significant in those aged > 65 years, the risk
estimate for those < 65 years was similar and the CIs overlapped
(Lagerqvist 2006). However, the results from TACTICS-TIMI 18
and FRISC-II differ from older excluded studies such as TIMI 3b,
which showed a significant hazard of intervention in the younger
trial participants (Anderson 1995). This point again reinforces the
reasoning behind only including studies that were undertaken in
the stent era since older studies are not relevant to contemporary
practice.
The American Heart Association statement on coronary care in
the elderly endorses an early invasive strategy for elderly patients
(Alexander 2007). Moreover, since elderly patients recruited into
clinical trials have fewer cardiovascular risk factors, fewer co-mor-
bidities, better hemodynamic and renal function than commu-
nity-dwelling elderly, event rates and benefit from an early inva-
sive strategy may be even greater in the ’real world’. Registry data
supports the use of the early invasive strategy in the elderly and
there is no stroke hazard as a consequence of intervention reported
in contemporary registries (Bauer 2007).
However, in the real world acute coronary care for the elderly is
provided within the health context and co-morbid status of the
patient. These factors also need to be considered for therapeutic
decision-making. Despite the lack of statisitcally significant bene-
fit with an invasive strategy in young age groups, this is not to say
that young patient with high risk features would not benefit from
an early invasive approach. Age is incorporated into the TIMI risk
score, which integrates several prognostic variables readily avail-
able from the clinical history and first-line investigations. Simi-
larly, retrospective analyses from the included studies have sug-
gested that diabetes, peripheral arterial disease and a history of
previous coronary artery bypass grafting are co-morbid conditions
associated with an increased risk of events and hence an enhanced
benefit from an early invasive strategy, with a more favorable risk-
benefit ratio (Januzzi 2005; Kugelmass 2006; Norhammar 2004).
However, as with age there is co-variation with other indicators
of high risk. Hence while retrospective analyses focusing on a sin-
gle indicator of higher risk are interesting, of greater interest is a
global, easily-applicable method of risk stratification that is easily
utilized by the practicing physician.
The importance of global risk stratification
As the above discussion highlights, and as subgroup analyses have
illustrated, risk stratification is an integral component of manag-
ing patients with UA/NSTEMI. The goal of risk stratification is
to identify patients with a high likelihood of complicated coro-
nary artery disease who are at increased risk of recurrent coronary
events or premature death and to offer such patients the bene-
fits of revascularization. However, the clinical distinction between
UA and NSTEMI does not adequately stratify high risk patients
(Zaacks 1999). Consequently, the current American Heart Asso-
ciation (AHA) guidelines recommend the use of several parame-
ters for risk stratification (Anderson 2007), for example the TIMI
risk score (Antman 2000). To underscore this point, in a post
hoc analysis of the FRISC-II data, participants with troponin T
> 0.03 ng/ml as well as ST depression showed statistically signif-
icant benefit with an early invasive strategy whereas participants
with only one of these variables did not (Diderholm 2002). Only
TACTICS-TIMI 18 undertook subgroup analyses based on TIMI
risk scores. The participants were stratified into three categories
based on their TIMI risk score; at low, intermediate or high risk.
The study showed that only intermediate and high risk patients
benefited from the invasive strategy with regard to the primary end-
point of death or non-fatal myocardial infarction or rehospitaliza-
tion for ACS. Unfortunately, data for the end-point of death or
non-fatal myocardial infarction were unavailable and could there-
fore not be incorporated into this review.
The TIMI score was extracted from the unfractionated heparin
15Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
arm of the TIMI 11B trial (TIMI 11B 1999) and was validated
in the enoxaparin arm of TIMI 11B and in both arms of the
ESSENCE (ESSENCE 1997) trial. The risk score was shown to
be a valid predictor of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction or
urgent revascularization within 14 days of randomization. Impor-
tantly, the TIMI score was also a predictor for each of the compo-
nents of this composite end-point (Antman 2000). The TIMI risk
score has been subsequently validated in the TIMI III registry of
unselected UA/NSTEMI patients and was shown to predict the
end-point of death, myocardial infarction or recurrent ischemia
and the components of the composite outcome at six weeks and
one year (Scirica 2002). Further, the TIMI risk score was validated
for the death, myocardial infarction or recurrent ischemia end-
point at up to six months in the PRISM-PLUS trial and was also
shown to predict benefit from tirofiban, even in patients with neg-
ative CK-MB (Morrow 2002). Hence, this versatile risk score is
able to identify patients with high event rates who may also ben-
efit from an invasive strategy. Intuitively, one would expect that
patients with higher TIMI scores, and therefore a higher risk for
mortality and recurrent events, have more extensive CAD on an-
giography. This has been confirmed in a retrospective analysis of
patients with UA/NSTEMI (Garcia 2004). These findings were
also confirmed by a retrospective analysis by the PRISM-PLUS in-
vestigators who showed the TIMI score to correlate with impaired
epicardial artery blood flow and the presence of visible thrombus
on angiography (Mega 2005). Although there are other published
risk scores for UA/NSTEMI (Goncalves 2005), the TIMI risk
score is perhaps the most widely used. Further, the low event rates
in ICTUS, which exclusively enrolled troponin-positive patients,
highlight the importance of considering multiple variables in risk
stratification. Indeed, on five-year follow up by the RITA-3 in-
vestigators, nine factors other than treatment group emerged as
multi-variate predictors of death or non-fatal myocardial infarc-
tion (Fox 2005). When the logistic coefficients for the risk factors
were added and the study population divided into quartile based
on risk score, patients in the highest quartile of risk score showed
substantially more benefit from an invasive strategy. Similarly, the
FRISC-II investigators developed a FRISC score that comprises
the addition of one point for each of seven factors. These are age
> 70 years, male sex, diabetes, previous MI, ST depression, in-
creased troponin and increased interleukin-6 or C-reactive protein
(Lagerqvist 2005). Having a medium to high risk (score of 3 to
7) predicted benefit from an early invasive strategy, with relative
risks of 0.64 (95% CI 0.51 to 0.80) at two years and 0.75 (95%
CI 0.64 to 0.89) at five years for the composite end-point of death
or non-fatal myocardial infarction (FRISC-II). Low risk patients
(score 0 to 2) did not benefit and had a trend to harm for the com-
posite end-point of death or non-fatal myocardial infarction, with
RR of 1.62 (95% CI 0.71 to 3.69) at two years and 1.26 (95%
CI 0.66 to 2.40) at five years (FRISC-II). In contrast, the ICTUS
investigators confirmed the prognostic utility of the FRISC score
but were unable to predict benefit from an early invasive strategy
in this trial; even the patients with the highest FRISC scores (5
to 7) derived no benefit from an early invasive strategy (RR 1.30,
95% CI 0.69 to 2.47) for the late death or myocardial infarction
end-point.
Current ’real world’ event rates in patients with UA/NSTEMI
compared to rates observed in the included trials
The GRACE registry, which collects data from 14 countries, has re-
ported mortality rates at six months post-discharge in patients hos-
pitalized with various forms of acute coronary syndrome. Entry cri-
teria for this registry include a history of chest pain and one of the
following, ischemic ECG changes, increased cardiac biomarkers
or a documented history of CAD. The in-hospital mortality rates
for patients recruited between 1999 to 2002 were 5.9% for pa-
tients with NSTEMI and 2.7% for patients with unstable angina.
Also, the six-month post-discharge mortality rates were 6.2% and
3.6% for NSTEMI and unstable angina, respectively (Goldberg
2005). Further, rehospitalization rates at six months post-discharge
were about 20%. In another report from the GRACE registry
that included patients recruited between 1999 and 2003, the six-
month post-discharge mortality rates were reported as 11.6% for
NSTEMI and 6.8% for unstable angina (Van de Werf 2005).
Clearly, the mortality rates from this real-world registry are higher
than those observed in the included studies as shown in Table 1.
However, these patients did not receive optimal medical manage-
ment in that only approximately 50% of NSTEMI patients re-
ceived ACE inhibitors, heparin or statins (Goldberg 2005). While
> 90% of patients received aspirin and > 80% received beta block-
ers, only 25% received glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists
and it is likely few would have received clopidogrel as the patients
studied were entered into the registry prior to the publication of
the CURE trial (CURE 2001). That is, before use of clopidogrel
for UA/NSTEMI became accepted as standard therapy. Similarly,
patients enrolled in UA/NSTEMI trials received higher rates of
medical therapy than patients enrolled in the CRUSADE reg-
istry (Kandzari 2005). However, the discrepancy in mortality rates
between the participants in the included studies of this review
and registry reported mortality rates is arguably too high to be
explained by advances in medical management of UA/NSTEMI
alone. Another explanation may be that selection and recruitment
protocols may bias trials to enrolling patients with a risk lower than
that seen in unselected patients entered into registries. While anal-
ysis of available data suggests that high risk patients may benefit
from an invasive strategy, this absolute benefit is likely to narrow as
early medical therapies and risk stratification procedures for UA/
NSTEMI improve, combined with appropriate use of deferred
coronary angiography and revascularization. This is the message
arising from ICTUS which constitutes the most contemporary
trial and promoted optimal medical management and risk strati-
fication. In light of ICTUS, the current (2007) AHA guidelines
endorse the option of treating stabilized but high risk (for example
16Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
troponin-positive) patients with a conservative strategy (Class IIb
recommendation) (Anderson 2007). This contrasts with the pre-
vious version of the AHA guidelines which only endorsed an inva-
sive strategy for patients with high risk features (Braunwald 2002).
This is what the European guidelines continue to recommend
(Bassand 2007). Novel medical therapies, like prasugrel instead
of clopidogrel (TRITON-TIMI 38 2007), continue to decrease
absolute event rates in patients with UA/NSTEMI and hence fu-
ture trials of invasive versus conservative management for UA/
NSETMI will be required as novel medical therapies are adopted.
It is likely that only progressively higher risk patients will continue
to benefit from early invasive intervention in the future. A report
from the GRACE registry has shown that increasing use of evi-
dence-based therapies has translated into reduced event rates with
time (Fox 2007b). However, lack of benefit in regard to several
end-points in this review may be due to lower risk patients being
selected for trial enrolment.
The general paucity of enrolment of patients with cardiogenic
shock or advanced Killip class in the included studies may mean
that the results of this systematic review are not applicable to this
high risk subset. Advanced Killip class has been identified as an in-
dependent predictor of mortality in patients with NSTEMI (Khot
2003), while Killip class and congestive heart failure (development
of or history of ) were shown to predict death or the composite of
death or myocardial infarction in the GRACE registry (Fox 2006).
Indeed, the current ACC/AHA guidelines for UA/NSTEMI rec-
ommend the use of features of heart failure as markers of increased
risk (Anderson 2007). However, most of the included studies do
not report Killip class, ejection fraction or brain natriuretic pep-
tides in their baseline characteristics; and the event rates in the in-
cluded studies indicate that patients with cardiogenic shock were
not included. An exception to this is the FRISC-II trial where 13%
of participants were reported to have an ejection fraction of < 45%
at baseline and the VINO trial where 53% of the population were
reported to have a baseline Killip class of II or III. This high per-
centage of patients with pulmonary edema in VINO may explain
why this trial had the highest standardized mortality rates of the
included studies (Table 1) and, while being a small trial, found
a robust benefit for an early invasive strategy. Observational data
have shown Killip class II and III patients to have significant mor-
tality benefit (at 30 days and 6 months) from an invasive strategy
while patients with Killip class I do not benefit (Rott 2001). The
SHOCK 1999 trial (n = 302), which recruited STEMI patients
with cardiogenic shock, found a significant mortalty benefit for
an early invasive strategy compared to a conservative strategy at
six months, with mortality rates being 50.3% and 63.1% (P =
0.027) respectively (SHOCK 1999). These are consistent with ob-
servations from the GRACE registry (Dauerman 2002). Similarly,
elevated N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP)
has been shown to predict a poor prognosis in patients with UA/
NSTEMI independently of age, Killip class or left ventricular ejec-
tion fraction (Jernberg 2004). In a retrospective subgroup analyses
from FRISC-II (n = 2017), NT-pronBNP measured at median 39
hours from symptom presentation correlated with TnT (r = 0.53,
P < 0.001), interleukin-6 (r = 0.29, P < 0.001) and severity of
coronary disease on angiography (Jernberg 2003). The relation-
ship between higher BNP and more severe angiographic coronary
disease was also found in a small retrospective analysis from the
TACTICS-TIMI 18 trial which also showed higher BNP to be as-
sociated with higher TIMI frame counts, consistent with reduced
myocardial perfusion perfusion (Sadanandan 2004). In FRISC-II,
NT-proBNP predicted two-year mortality independently of TnT,
interleukin-6 and left ventricular ejection fraction in this cohort
but did not predict the incidence of myocardial infarction. Im-
portantly, this retrospective subgroup analysis from the FRISC-II
investigators suggested that the early invasive strategy only im-
proved two-year mortality in patients in the highest tertile of NT-
proBNP (> 906 ng/L for men, > 1345 ng/L for women) and with
an interleukin-6 concentration > 5ng/ml (absolute risk reduction
of 7.3%; RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.00). Such retrospective anal-
yses are hypothesis generating and by no means definitive. A sim-
ilar analysis from TACTICS TIMI18 (n = 1676) measured BNP
instead of NT-proBNP and dichotomized patients at a BNP of >
80 ng/L. The analysis found that patients with elevated BNP had
higher seven-day and six-month mortality (2.5% versus 0.7%, P
< 0.01; and 8.4% versus 1.8%, P < 0.01 respectively) but BNP
was not shown to predict benefit of an invasive strategy (Morrow
2003). This may be due to the relatively short follow up of the
TACTICS TIMI18 study, which was only six months (Table 1).
The ICTUS investigators also examined the prognostic influence
of NT-proBNP measured at median 13 hours from presentation
in a 1141 patient subgroup from the main trial (Windhausen
2007a). In the highest quartile (> 1170 ng/L for men, > 2150 ng/
L for women) one-year mortality was 7.3% compared to 1.1% for
patients in the lower three quartiles. However, as with the retro-
spective analyses from FRISC-II and TACTICS-TIMI 18, NT-
proBNP failed to predict myocardial infarction and, in contrast to
FRISC-II, elevated NT-proBNP did not predict benefit from an
early invasive strategy in the ICTUS cohort (Windhausen 2007a).
Hence, the role of natriuretic peptides and assessment of patients
for clinical features of congestive heart failure in UA/NSTEMI
need to be further elucidated. In the interim, patients with features
of congestive heart failure need to be considered at high risk for
death and managed with aggressive therapy.
The GRACE investigators determined predictors of a poor prog-
nosis which were derived from and validated in cohorts enrolled
in GRACE between 1999 to 2002 and 2002 to --2003 respec-
tively (Eagle 2004). The investigators identified nine variables.
These were older age, history of myocardial infarction, history of
heart failure, increased heart rate, lower systolic blood pressure, el-
evated creatinine, elevated cardiac biomarkers, ST depression and
not having PCI as independent predictors of increased six-month
mortality across the ACS spectrum. Importantly, the GRACE risk
17Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
score incorporates renal function, which is an important and prac-
tical risk prognosticator in UA/NSTEMI that was not considered
during the derivation of the TIMI risk score (Antman 2000). In
a retrospective subgroup analysis of the FRISC-II trial, creatinine
clearance was estimated from serum creatinine with the Cockcroft-
Gault formula (Johnston 2006). In the conservatively managed
patients, the rates of death or myocardial infarction for creatinine
clearances of < 69 mL/min, 69 to 90 mL/min and > 90 mL/min
were 22.4%, 14.6% and 11.6%, respectively. The corresponding
event rates in the invasive strategy were 14.6% (P < 0.01 versus
conservative), 9.9% (P = 0.048 versus conservative) and 11.2%,
respectively. Indeed, there was a significant interaction between
treatment strategy and outcomes in patients with a creatinine clear-
ance of < 90 mL/min. These data are indeed sobering since pa-
tients with renal dysfunction are often denied aggressive therapy in
the real world, possibly because of clinician concerns about bleed-
ing risk and a poor prognosis regardless of therapy. These data are
particularly relevant to clinicians practicing in countries where an
estimate of glomerular filtration rate is mandatory on adult elec-
trolyte panels, as is standard in the United States and Australia.
Hence, risk stratification is an integral part of the management of
patients with UA/NSTEMI and needs to be considered carefully
in future prospective randomized controlled trials on the topic.
Further, the role of estimated glomerular filtration rate and NT-
proBNP in risk prognotication over and above established markers
such as the TIMI risk score need to be further evaluated.
Current ’real world’ management of patients with
UA/NSTEMI with emphasis on the relationship between
patient risk and subsequent management
Despite the extensive literature on risk stratification, real-world
data from the GRACE registry has shown that high risk patients
are no more likely to receive enoxaparin, glycoprotein IIb/IIIa re-
ceptor antagonists or to undergo catheterization and PCI than
low risk patients (Oliveira 2007). In a different analysis from the
GRACE registry that only included patients recruited with direct
access to a catheterization laboratory, an inverse relationship was
found between the level of patient risk (with the GRACE risk
score) and the frequency of angiography and PCI (Fox 2007a). In-
deed, the rates of cardiac catheterization in low, medium and high
risk patients with UA/NSTEMI were 72%, 68% and 51% respec-
tively, while the rates of PCI were 40%, 35% and 25% respec-
tively. Further, thienopyridines and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor
antagonists were more commonly used in low risk patients than
medium or high risk patients with similar findings in a Canadian
registry (Yan 2007). Likewise, diabetics are a higher risk cohort
that are not treated more aggressively than non-diabetics with UA/
NSTEMI (Franklin 2004). The reasons for the discrepancy be-
tween patient risk and treatment have been unclear but recent data
from a Canadian registry suggests that the most common reason
for under-utilization of an invasive strategy in high risk patients
is under-estimation of patient risk by the treating physician (Lee
2008). In this regard, a focused initiative to educate physicians on
risk stratfication may yield results in improving quality of care in
patients with UA/NSTEMI.
Quality of life end-points
Although not an initial outcome of this systematic review, this sec-
tion herein provides a narrative discussion of health-related quality
of life (HRQOL) outcomes. Four studies specifically investigated
health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and functional status fol-
lowing invasive management for non-STEMI compared to non-
invasive management. One was a trial which had changes in QOL
as a primary end-point and the other three were analyses from
included studies where HRQOL measures were secondary end-
points. In the primary end-point trial, involving only 88 patients
(Eisenberg 2005), there was no difference between groups at 12
months in peak exercise reached on an endurance exercise tread-
mill (7.8 versus 6.7 metabolic equivalents). Functional status was
improved in the invasive group (Duke Activity Status Index scores
4.3 versus -3.5, P = 0.04) as was angina-specific quality of life
measured by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire measure of anginal
stability (21.6 versus -5.3, P = 0.020), anginal frequency (22.9
versus 2.3, P = 0.02) and treatment satisfaction (11.2 versus -10.3,
P = 0.02).
In the RITA-3 trial (Kim 2005), HRQOL was assessed with the
Short Form-36 (SF-36), Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ), Eu-
roQOL Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS) and EuroQOL 5-Di-
mensional Classification (EQ-5D) at baseline, four-month and
one-year follow up. Mean changes from baseline EQ-VAS scores
were better for the invasive versus non-invasive strategy at four
months (treatment difference of 3.0, P < 0.001) and one year (2.3,
P < 0.01). The EQ-5D utility scores were also higher for the inva-
sive group at four months (treatment difference 0.036, P < 0.01)
but not at one year (0.016, P = 0.20). For SF-36, the invasive strat-
egy scored significantly better at four months for physical func-
tion, physical role function, emotional role function, social func-
tion, vitality and general health. The SAQ scores for exertional ca-
pacity, anginal stability and frequency, treatment satisfaction and
disease perception were significantly better for the invasive strategy
at both four months and one year, although attenuated at the last
follow up. The authors concluded that improvements in HRQOL
for the invasive strategy were most likely due to improvements in
anginal symptoms.
In the FRISC II trial (Janzon 2004), HRQOL was measured using
the generic Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36) and
the disease-specific Angina Pectoris Quality of Life Questionnaire
(APQLQ) at baseline and three, six and 12 months follow up.
The invasively treated group showed a significantly better quality
of life in all eight scales and both component scores (physical and
mental) of the SF-36 at three and six-month follow up (P < 0.01)
compared with the non-invasively treated group. These differences
18Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
remained at 12-month follow up, with significance in seven of the
scales and in the physical component score. The invasive group
scored significantly more highly on all five subscales of the APQLQ
scores at three months (P < 0.01), on four subscales at six months
(P < 0.05) but only on one subscale at one year.
The TACTICS-TIMI 18 trial (Weintraub 1999) planned to assess
health status using some measure of utility in order to perform cost-
effectiveness evaluations of invasive versus non-invasive strategy
but subsequent publications (Mahoney 2002) failed to disclose
HRQOL data. From the available evidence it would appear that
improvements in HRQOL as a result of an invasive strategy are
modest and last on average no more than 12 months, with anginal
relief being the key determinant of improved HRQOL.
Findings from studies in the pre-stent era and other reviews
on this topic
We excluded two large trials that were undertaken in the pre-stent
era (TIMI-3b 1995; VANQWISH 1998). The early invasive arm
of TIMI-3b 1995 involved cardiac catheterization at an average 36
hours of randomization and coronary revascularization by coro-
nary angioplasty or CABG. The early invasive strategy had no ef-
fect on hard clinical end-points of death, myocardial infarction,
stroke or the composite of death or myocardial infarction. As is
consistent with more recent clinical trials, the early invasive strat-
egy reduced recurrent hospitalization at both six weeks and one
year, with RR of 0.54 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.74) and 0.79 (95% CI
0.68 to 0.93) respectively (TIMI-3b 1995). In TIMI-3b 1995 an
early invasive strategy did not reduce the need for angina medica-
tions at one year. In contrast, the VANQWISH study showed a
hazard associated with the early invasive strategy, which involved
cardiac catheterization at an average 48 hours after randomization.
Indeed, the early invasive strategy was associated with an increased
relative risk of mortality at hospital discharge, one month and one
year (RR of 3.47 (95% CI 1.41 to 8.52; 2.53, 95% CI 1.19 to
5.42; and 1.60, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.37 respectively) (VANQWISH
1998). Similarly, a hazard was associated with the early invasive
strategy for the composite end-point of death or non-fatal myocar-
dial infarction. The hazard of an early invasive strategy on these
end-points ceased to be significant by the end of the study (average
23 months). Forty-four per cent of patients in the invasive arm of
this trial underwent a revascularization procedure, 47% involving
CABG. The mortality associated with CABG in the invasive arm
was 11.6% compared to 3.4% in the conservative arm.This dis-
crepancy has been cited as an explanation for the increased mortal-
ity in the early invasive arm of the VANQWISH trial (Braunwald
2003). Not surprisingly, rates of background medical therapy were
low by contemporary standards; glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor an-
tagonists, ticlopidine or statins were not routinely used.
Two older meta-analyses on this topic that included the afore-
mentioned old trials and trials that we excluded for reasons other
than low stent use reached different conclusions to the ones pre-
sented here (Choudhry 2005; Mehta 2005). These reviews did
not include the most recent trial, the ICTUS study, although a
subsequent meta-analysis included the early trials and the one-
year results from ICTUS (Bavry 2006). The review by Mehta et
al showed that an invasive strategy was associated with a mortality
hazard from randomization to hospital discharge (RR 1.61, 95%
CI 1.14 to 2.27) (Mehta 2005). An early hazard with an invasive
strategy was not found in this review, possibly because outdated
studies were excluded. When Mehta et al analysed outcomes from
hospital discharge to end of follow up, the early invasive strategy
was associated with reductions in death and reductions in non-
fatal myocardial infarction (RR of 0.78, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.94;
and 0.56, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.68 respectively). When Mehta et al
analysed trial data from randomization to end of follow up, the
invasive strategy had a null effect on mortality but a reduction in
non-fatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.89).
This is consistent with the finding of this review. This review anal-
ysed the end-points at certain time points since it was felt that
combining outcomes collected from studies with short duration
(six months) with those of long duration (five years) would not
provide a meaningful point estimate (see table ’Caracteristics of
included studies’). A significant reduction in recurrent angina and
rehospitalization with an invasive strategy was a consistent finding
across all reviews (Bavry 2006; Choudhry 2005; Mehta 2005).
More recently, a meta-regression analysis that included the earlier
studies but which excluded VANQWISH 1998 showed that the
benefit of the invasive strategy with respect to the end-point of
death or the composite of death or myocardial infarction to be
related to the comparator odds ratio for events in the conservative
group (Tarantini 2007). This implies that the benefit of the inva-
sive strategy relates to the baseline risk in the comparator group.
One meta-analysis has been published since the publication of
late follow up from the ICTUS trial and this report, which in-
cluded the older studies, found no benefit of an invasive strategy
on the end-points of death, myocardial infarction or the composite
of death or myocardial infarction (Qayyum 2008). The findings
from our analysis differ because we excluded older studies and uti-
lized the reported ’spontaneous’ myocardial infarction end-point
for our analysis in light of the controversy surrounding the routine
peri-procedural biomarker assessment undertaken by the ICTUS
investigators.
A U T H O R S ’ C O N C L U S I O N S
Implications for practice
The most consistent and robust findings of this review are that an
invasive strategy in UA/NSTEMI results in a significant 33% rela-
tive risk reduction for both the end-points of refractory angina and
rehospitalization at six to 12 months. While the invasive strategy
is associated with a two fold increase in the risk of peri-procedural
19Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
myocardial infarction, the available data suggest a significant 27%
and 22% relative risk reduction in the rate of myocardial infarction
assessed at six to 12 months and three to five years, respectively.
Hence the early hazard associated with a routine invasive strategy
must be weighed against potential long term benefit in clinical
end-points. However, longer term follow up of more contempo-
rary trials may show this benefit to be attenuated by more optimal
use of medical therapies and deployment of more rigorous risk
stratification protocols in the days immediately following onset of
the acute event. The benefits of an early invasive strategy may be
more meaningful in higher risk patients who would be expected
to have a lower number needed to treat. The data presented in
this review suggest that an early invasive strategy is superior to a
conservative strategy. Larger trials with greater power for mortal-
ity end-points are required. For illustrative purposes, the weighted
average mortality in the conservative arm of included studies was
10.1% by end of follow up. The power to detect a 10% difference
between the treatment strategies with the included number of pa-
tients is only 27%. Hence, more data is required before firm con-
clusions regarding the benefits and harms of an invasive strategy
on mortality can be reached.
Implications for research
This review has highlighted the need for further research on treat-
ment strategies for UA/NSTEMI. The trials have enrolled hetero-
geneous populations of patients with variable levels of risks and
event rates, subject to varying co-interventions, and using outcome
measures subject to variable definition and timing. Risk stratifica-
tion of the participants in each trial based on a validated risk system
(for example the TIMI risk score) would allow for more meaning-
ful meta-analyses of available data and provide a risk score or an
absolute event rate above which an invasive strategy is expected to
significantly improve outcomes. Clearly as medical therapies for
UA/NSTEMI improve, progressively less absolute benefit is to be
gained by intervention and hence the risk at which invasive inter-
vention is warranted is likely to represent a moving target. Another
major limitation to the analyses undertaken in this review is the
underpowering of trials regarding the effects of an invasive strategy
on all-cause mortality due to the short length of follow up and
in interpretation of sub-group analyses. This could be addressed
in future clinical trials by ensuring sufficient events to accrue by
way of either larger sample sizes, enrolment of higher risk patients
or longer follow up. Finally, further research is required to better
define the benefits and hazards of an invasive strategy in females.
A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S
We would like to thank Dr Jenny A Doust (JAD) for being an
author on a previous version of this review where she contributed
to the design of the review, extracted data, assessed the quality
of included studies and assisted in the interpretation of the data.
We would like to thank Professor Shah Ebrahim of the Cochrane
Heart Group for his helpful comments and aid in editing the
protocol of this review.
R E F E R E N C E S
References to studies included in this review
FRISC-II {published data only}
Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable
coronary-artery disease: FRISC II prospective randomised
multicentre study. Lancet 1999;354(9180):708–15.
Diderholm E, Andren B, Frostfeldt G, Genberg M,
Jernberg T, Lagerqvist B, et al.ST depression in ECG at
entry indicates severe coronary lesions and large benefits of
an early invasive treatment strategy in unstable coronary
artery disease; the FRISC II ECG substudy. The Fast
Revascularisation during InStability in Coronary artery
disease. European Heart Journal 2002;23(1):41–9.
Diderholm E, Andren B, Frostfeldt G, Genberg M, Jernberg
T, Lagerqvist B, et al.The prognostic and therapeutic
implications of increased troponin T levels and ST
depression in unstable coronary artery disease: the FRISC II
invasive troponin T electrocardiogram substudy. American
Heart Journal 2002;143(5):760–7.
Holmvang L, Clemmensen P, Lindahl B, Lagerqvist B,
Venge P, Wagner G, Wallentin L, et al.Quantitative analysis
of the admission electrocardiogram identifies patients with
unstable coronary artery disease who benefit the most from
early invasive treatment. Journal of the American College of
Cardiology 2003;41(6):905–15.
Lagerqvist B, Husted S, Kontny F, Naslund U, Stahle E,
Swahn E, et al.A long-term perspective on the protective
effects of an early invasive strategy in unstable coronary
artery disease: two-year follow-up of the FRISC-II invasive
study. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2002;40
(11):1902–14.
Lagerqvist B, Husted S, Kontny F, Stahle E, Swahn E,
Wallentin L. 5-year outcomes in the FRISC-II randomised
trial of an invasive versus a non-invasive strategy in non-
ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: a follow-up study.
Lancet 2006;368(9540):998–1004.
Lagerqvist B, Safstrom K, Stahle E, Wallentin L, Swahn
E, FRISC II Study Group Investigators. Is early invasive
treatment of unstable coronary artery disease equally
effective for both women and men? FRISC II Study Group
Investigators. Journal of the American College of Cardiology
2001;38(1):41–8.
Wallentin L, Lagerqvist B, Husted S, Kontny F, Stahle E,
20Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Swahn E. Outcome at 1 year after an invasive compared
with a non-invasive strategy in unstable coronary-artery
disease: the FRISC II invasive randomised trial. FRISC II
Investigators. Fast Revascularisation during Instability in
Coronary artery disease. Lancet 2000;356(9223):9–16.
ICTUS {published data only}
de Winter RJ, Windhausen F, Cornel JH, Dunselman
PH, Janus CL, Bendermacher PE, et al.Early invasive
versus selectively invasive management for acute coronary
syndromes. New England Journal of Medicine 2005;353
(11):1095–104.
Hirsch A, Windhausen F, Tijssen JG, Verheugt FW, Cornel
JH, de Winter RJ. Long-term outcome after an early
invasive versus selective invasive treatment strategy in
patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome
and elevated cardiac troponin T (the ICTUS trial): a follow-
up study. Lancet 2007;369(9564):827–35.
Windhausen F, Hirsch A, Tijssen JG, Cornel JH,
Verheugt FW, Klees MI, et al.ST-segment deviation on
the admission electrocardiogram, treatment strategy, and
outcome in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes.
A substudy of the Invasive versus Conservative Treatment
in Unstable coronary Syndromes (ICTUS) Trial. Journal of
Electrocardiology 2007;40(5):408–15.
RITA-3 {published data only}
Clayton TC, Pocock SJ, Henderson RA, Poole-Wilson
PA, Shaw TR, Knight R, et al.Do men benefit more than
women from an interventional strategy in patients with
unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction?
The impact of gender in the RITA 3 trial. European Heart
Journal 2004;25(18):1641–50.
Fox KA, Poole-Wilson P, Clayton TC, Henderson RA, Shaw
TR, Wheatley DJ, et al.5-year outcome of an interventional
strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: the
British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial. Lancet
2005;366(9489):914–20.
Fox KA, Poole-Wilson PA, Henderson RA, Clayton TC,
Chamberlain DA, Shaw TR, et al.Interventional versus
conservative treatment for patients with unstable angina
or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the British
Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial. Randomized
Intervention Trial of unstable Angina. Lancet 2002;360
(9335):743–51.
TACTICS-TIMI 18 {published data only}
Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, Demopoulos LA, Vicari R,
Frey MJ, Lakkis N, et al.Comparison of early invasive and
conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary
syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor
tirofiban. New England Journal of Medicine 2001;344(25):
1879–87.
Glaser R, Herrmann HC, Murphy SA, Demopoulos LA,
DiBattiste PM, Cannon CP, et al.Benefit of an early invasive
management strategy in women with acute coronary
syndromes. JAMA 2002;288(24):3124–9.
Morrow DA, Cannon CP, Rifai N, Frey MJ, Vicari R,
Lakkis N, et al.Ability of minor elevations of troponins I
and T to predict benefit from an early invasive strategy
in patients with unstable angina and non-ST elevation
myocardial infarction: results from a randomized trial.
JAMA 2001;286(19):2405–12.
Sabatine MS, Morrow DA, McCabe CH, Antman EM,
Gibson CM, Cannon CP. Combination of quantitative ST
deviation and troponin elevation provides independent
prognostic and therapeutic information in unstable angina
and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. American
Heart Journal 2006;151(1):25–31.
VINO {published data only}
Spacek R, Widimsky P, Straka Z, Jiresova E, Dvorak J,
Polasek R, et al.Value of first day angiography/angioplasty in
evolving Non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction:
an open multicenter randomized trial. The VINO Study.
European Heart Journal 2003;23(3):230–8.
References to studies excluded from this review
Eisenberg 2005 {published data only}
Eisenberg MJ, Teng FF, Chaudhry MR, Ortiz J, Sobkowski
W, Ebrahim I, et al.Impact of invasive management versus
noninvasive management on functional status and quality
of life following non-Q-wave myocardial infarction: a
randomized clinical trial. American Heart Journal 2005;149
(5):813–9.
GUSTO2b 2003 {published data only}
Cho L, Bhatt DL, Marso SP, Brennan D, Holmes DR Jr,
Califf RM, et al.An invasive strategy is associated with
decreased mortality in patients with unstable angina and
non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: GUSTO IIb trial.
American Journal of Medicine 2003;114(2):106–11.
MATE 1998 {published data only}
McCullough PA, O’Neill WW, Graham M, Stomel RJ,
Rogers F, David S, et al.A prospective randomized trial of
triage angiography in acute coronary syndromes ineligible
for thrombolytic therapy. Results of the medicine versus
angiography in thrombolytic exclusion (MATE) trial.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology 1998;32(3):
596–605.
MITI 2000 {published data only}
Scull GS, Martin JS, Weaver WD, Every NR. Early
angiography versus conservative treatment in patients
with non-ST elevation acute myocardial infarction:
MITI Investigators. Myocardial Infarction Triage and
Intervention. Journal of the American College of Cardiology
2000;35(4):895–902.
Neumann 2003 {published data only}
Neumann FJ, Kastrati A, Pogatsa-Murray G, Mehilli J,
Bollwein H, Bestehorn HP, et al.Evaluation of prolonged
antithrombotic pretreatment (“cooling-off” strategy) before
intervention in patients with unstable coronary syndromes:
a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2003;290(12):
1593–9.
TIMI-3b 1995 {published data only}
Anderson HV, Cannon CP, Stone PH, Williams DO,
McCabe CH, Knatterud GL, et al.One-year results of the
Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) IIIB clinical
21Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
trial. A randomized comparison of tissue-type plasminogen
activator versus placebo and early invasive versus early
conservative strategies in unstable angina and non-Q wave
myocardial infarction. Journal of the American College of
Cardiology 1995;26(7):1643–50.
TRUCS 2000 {published data only}
Michalis LK, Stroumbis CS, Pappas K, Sourla E, Niokou
D, Goudevenos JA, et al.Treatment of refractory unstable
angina in geographically isolated areas without cardiac
surgery. Invasive versus conservative strategy (TRUCS
study). European Heart Journal 2000;21(23):1954–9.
VANQWISH 1998 {published data only}
Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Crawford MH, Blaustein AS,
Deedwania PC, Zoble RG, et al.Outcomes in patients with
acute non-Q-wave myocardial infarction randomly assigned
to an invasive as compared with a conservative management
strategy. Veterans Affairs Non-Q-Wave Infarction Strategies
in Hospital (VANQWISH) Trial Investigators. New
England Journal of Medicine 1998;338(25):1785–92.
Zhao 2005 {published data only}
Jiang LQ, Zhao MZ, Hu DY. Predictive value of positive
troponin I in clinical prognosis of non-ST-segment elevation
acute coronary syndrome. Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi 2005;
44(5):350–2.∗ Zhao MZ, Hu DY, Jiang LQ, Wu Y, Zhu TG, Hao HJ,
et al.The effect of early invasive strategy on early and late
outcomes in high-risk non-ST-segment elevation acute
coronary syndromes. Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi 2005;44
(10):737–40.
Zhao MZ, Hu DY, Ma CS, Jiang LQ, Huo Y, Zhu TG,
et al.The relationship between TIMI (thrombolysis in
myocardial infarction) risk score and efficacy of conservative
or interventional strategy in patients with non-ST-segment
elevation acute coronary syndromes. Zhonghua Xin Xue
Guan Bing Za Zhi 2006;34(11):1001–4.
Zhao MZ, Hu DY, Zhang FC, Wu Y, Yan MY, Wang SW,
et al.The changes of electrocardiogram and impact of early
invasive strategy in patients with acute coronary syndromes
without ST-segment elevation. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi
2005;85(13):879–82.
Additional references
Al Suwaidi 2004
Al Suwaidi J, Holmes DR Jr, Salam AM, Lennon R,
Berger PB. Impact of coronary artery stents on mortality
and nonfatal myocardial infarction: meta-analysis of
randomized trials comparing a strategy of routine stenting
with that of balloon angioplasty. American Heart Journal
2004;147(5):815–22.
Alexander 2007
Alexander KP, Newby LK, Cannon CP, Armstrong
PW, Gibler WB, Rich MW, et al.Acute coronary care
in the elderly, part I: Non-ST-segment-elevation acute
coronary syndromes: a scientific statement for healthcare
professionals from the American Heart Association Council
on Clinical Cardiology: in collaboration with the Society of
Geriatric Cardiology. Circulation 2007;115(19):2549–69.
Anderson 1995
Anderson HV, Cannon CP, Stone PH, Williams DO,
McCabe CH, Knatterud GL, et al.One-year results of the
Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) IIIB clinical
trial. A randomized comparison of tissue-type plasminogen
activator versus placebo and early invasive versus early
conservative strategies in unstable angina and non-Q wave
myocardial infarction. Journal of the American College of
Cardiologists 1995;26(7):1643–50.
Anderson 2007
Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, Bridges CR, Califf
RM, Casey DE Jr, et al.ACC/AHA 2007 guidelines for
the management of patients with unstable angina/non ST-
elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American
College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task
Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2007;116(7):
e148–304.
Antman 1996
Antman EM, Tanasijevic MJ, Thompson B, Schactman M,
McCabe CH, Cannon CP, et al.Cardiac-specific troponin I
levels to predict the risk of mortality in patients with acute
coronary syndromes. New England Journal of Medicine
1996;335(18):1342–9.
Antman 2000
Antman EM, Cohen M, Bernink PJ, McCabe CH, Horacek
T, Papuchis G, et al.The TIMI risk score for unstable
angina/non-ST elevation MI: A method for prognostication
and therapeutic decision making. JAMA 2000;284(7):
835–42.
Antman 2004
Antman EM, Anbe DT, Armstrong PW, Bates ER, Green
LA, Hand M. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of
patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report
of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart
Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee
to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of
Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction). Circulation
2004;110(9):e82–e292.
Armstrong 1998
Armstrong PW, Fu Y, Chang W-C, Topol EJ, Granger CB,
Betriu A, et al.Acute coronary syndromes in the GUSTO-
IIb trial: prognostic insights and impact of recurrent
ischemia. Circulation 1998;98:1860–8.
Bach 2004
Bach RG, Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, DiBattiste PM,
Demopoulos LA, Anderson HV, et al.The effect of routine,
early invasive management on outcome for elderly patients
with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes.
Annals of Internal Medicine 2004;141(3):186–95.
Bassand 2007
Bassand JP, Hamm CW, Ardissino D, Boersma E, Budaj
A, Fernández-Avilés F, et al.Guidelines for the diagnosis
and treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute
22Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
coronary syndromes. European Heart Journal 2007;28(13):
1598–660.
Bauer 2007
Bauer T, Koeth O, Jünger C, Heer T, Wienbergen H, Gitt
A, et al.Effect of an invasive strategy on in-hospital outcome
in elderly patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial
infarction. European Heart Journal 2007;28(23):2873–8.
Bavry 2006
Bavry AA, Kumbhani DJ, Rassi AN, Bhatt DL, Askari
AT. Benefit of early invasive therapy in acute coronary
syndromes: a meta-analysis of contemporary randomized
clinical trials. Journal of the American College of Cardiology
2006;48(7):1319–25.
Benamer 1999
Benamer H, Steg PG, Benessiano J, Vicaut E, Gaultier CJ,
Aubry P, et al.Elevated cardiac troponin I predicts a high-
risk angiographic anatomy of the culprit lesion in unstable
angina. American Heart Journal 1999;137(5):815–20.
Bhatt 2005
Bhatt DL, Topol EJ. Does creatinine kinase-MB elevation
after percutaneous coronary intervention predict outcomes
in 2005? Periprocedural cardiac enzyme elevation predicts
adverse outcomes. Circulation 2005;112(6):906–15.
Biondi-Zoccai 2005
Biondi-Zoccai GG, Abbate A, Agostoni P, Testa L, Burzotta
F, Lotrionte M, et al.Long-term benefits of an early invasive
management in acute coronary syndromes depend on
intracoronary stenting and aggressive antiplatelet treatment:
a metaregression. American Heart Journal 2005;149(3):
504–11.
Blankstein 2005
Blankstein R, Ward RP, Arnsdorf M, Jones B, Lou YB,
Pine M. Female gender is an independent predictor of
operative mortality after coronary artery bypass graft
surgery: contemporary analysis of 31 Midwestern hospitals.
Circulation 2005;112 Suppl(9):I323–7.
Boden 1991
Boden WE, Krone RJ, Kleiger RE, Oakes D, Greenberg
H, Dwyer EJ Jnr, et al.Electrocardiographic subset analysis
of diltiazem administration on long-term outcome after
acute myocardial infarction. The Multicenter Diltiazem
Post-Infarction Trial Research Group. American Journal of
Cardiology 1991;67(5):335–42.
Boersma 2002
Boersma E, Harrington RA, Moliterno DJ, White H,
Theroux P, Van de Werf F, et al.Platelet glycoprotein IIb/
IIIa inhibitors in acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis
of all major randomised clinical trials. Lancet 2002;359
(9302):189–98.
Braunwald 1998
Braunwald E. Unstable angina: an etiologic approach to
management. Circulation 1998;98(21):2219–22.
Braunwald 2002
Braunwald E, Antman EM, Beasley JW, Califf RM, Cheitlin
MD, Hochman JS, et al.ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update
for the management of patients with unstable angina and
non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction--summary
article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/
American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines
(Committee on the Management of Patients With Unstable
Angina). Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2002;
40(7):1366–74.
Braunwald 2003
Braunwald E. Application of current guidelines to the
management of unstable angina and non-ST-elevation
myocardial infarction. Circulation 2003;108 Suppl 1(16):
III28–37.
Cairns 1985
Cairns JA, Gent M, Singer J, Finnie KJ, Froggatt GM,
Holder DA, et al.Aspirin, sulfinpyrazone, or both in
unstable angina. Results of a Canadian multicenter trial.
New England Journal of Medicine 1985;313(22):1369–75.
Cannon 1997
Cannon CP, McCabe CH, Stone PH, Rogers WJ,
Schactman M, Thompson BW, et al.The electrocardiogram
predicts one-year outcome of patients with unstable angina
and non-Q wave myocardial infarction: results of the
TIMI III Registry ECG Ancillary Study. Thrombolysis in
Myocardial Ischemia. Journal of the American College of
Cardiology 1997;30(1):133–40.
CAPTURE 1997
Simoons ML, Rutsch W, Vahanian A, Adgey J, Maseri A,
Vassanelli C, et al.Randomised placebo-controlled trial
of abciximab before and during coronary intervention in
refractory unstable angina: the CAPTURE Study. Lancet
1997;349(9063):1429–35.
Choudhry 2005
Choudhry NK, Singh JM, Barolet A, Tomlinson GA,
Detsky AS. How should patients with unstable angina
and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction be
managed? A meta-analysis of randomized trials. American
Journal of Medicine 2005;118(5):465–74.
Clayton 2004
Clayton TC, Pocock SJ, Henderson RA, Poole-Wilson
PA, Shaw TR, Knight R, et al.Do men benefit more than
women from an interventional strategy in patients with
unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction?
The impact of gender in the RITA 3 trial. Eurpean Heart
Journal 2004;25(18):1641–50.
COURAGE 2007
Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, Hartigan PM, Maron
DJ, Kostuk WJ, et al.Optimal medical therapy with or
without PCI for stable coronary disease. New England
Journal of Medicine 2007;356:1503–16.
Cucherat 2003
Cucherat M, Bonnefoy E, Tremeau G. Primary angioplasty
versus intravenous thrombolysis for acute myocardial
infarction (Cochrane Review). Cochrane Database of
Systematic Reviews 2003, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/
14651858.CD001560.pub2]
23Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
CURE 2001
The Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent
Events Trial Investigators. Effects of clopidogrel in addition
to aspirin in patients with acute coronary syndromes
without ST-Segment Elevation. New England Journal of
Medicine 2001;345:494–502.
Cutlip 2005
Cutlip DE, Kuntz RE. Does creatinine kinase-MB elevation
after percutaneous coronary intervention predict outcomes
in 2005? Cardiac enzyme elevation after successful
percutaneous coronary intervention is not an independent
predictor of adverse outcomes. Circulation 2005;112(6):
916–22.
Dauerman 2002
Dauerman HL, Goldberg RJ, White K, Gore JM, Sadiq I,
Gurfinkel E, et al.Revascularization, stenting, and outcomes
of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by
cardiogenic shock. American Journal of Cardiology 2002;90
(8):838–42.
de Winter 2005
de Winter RJ, Windhausen F, Cornel JH, Dunselman
PH, Janus CL, Bendermacher PE, et al.Early invasive
versus selectively invasive management for acute coronary
syndromes. New England Journal of Medicine 2005;353
(11):1095–104.
DeWood 1980
DeWood MA, Spores J, Notske R, Mouser LT, Burroughs
R, Golden MS, et al.Prevalence of total coronary occlusion
during the early hours of transmural myocardial infarction.
New England Journal of Medicine 1980;303(16):897–902.
DeWood 1986
DeWood MA, Stifter WF, Simpson CS, Spores J, Eugster
GS, Judge TP, et al.Coronary arteriographic findings soon
after non-Q-wave myocardial infarction. New England
Journal of Medicine 1986;315(7):417–23.
Diderholm 2002
Diderholm E, Andren B, Frostfeldt G, Genberg M, Jernberg
T, Lagerqvist B, et al.The prognostic and therapeutic
implications of increased troponin T levels and ST
depression in unstable coronary artery disease: the FRISC II
invasive troponin T electrocardiogram substudy. American
Heart Journal 2002;143(5):760–7.
Dokainish 2005
Dokainish H, Pillai M, Murphy SA, DiBattiste PM,
Schweiger MJ, Lotfi A, et al.Prognostic implications of
elevated troponin in patients with suspected acute coronary
syndrome but no critical epicardial coronary disease: a
TACTICS-TIMI-18 substudy. Journal of the American
College of Cardiology 2005;45(1):19–24.
Eagle 2004
Eagle KA, Lim MJ, Dabbous OH, Pieper KS, Goldberg RJ,
Van de Werf F, et al.A validated prediction model for all
forms of acute coronary syndrome: estimating the risk of
6-month postdischarge death in an international registry.
JAMA 2004;291(22):2727–33.
EPIC 1994
Shadoff N, Valett N, Bates E, Galeana A, Knopf W, Shaftel
J, et al.Use of a monoclonal antibody directed against the
platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor in high-risk coronary
angioplasty. The EPIC Investigation. New England Journal
of Medicine 1994;330(14):956–61.
EPILOG 1997
Topol EJ, Califf RM, Lincoff AM, Tcheng JE, Cabot CF,
Weisman HF, et al.Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor
blockade and low-dose heparin during percutaneous
coronary revascularization. The EPILOG Investigators.
New England Journal of Medicine 1997;336(24):1689–96.
EPISTENT 1998
Topol EJ, Lincoff AM, Califf RM, Tcheng JE, Cohen
EA, Kleiman NS, et al.Randomised placebo-controlled
and balloon-angioplasty-controlled trial to assess safety of
coronary stenting with use of platelet glycoprotein-IIb/IIIa
blockade. The EPISTENT Investigators. Lancet 1998;352
(9122):87–92.
ESSENCE 1997
Cohen M, Demers C, Gurfinkel EP, Turpie AG, Fromell
GJ, Goodman S, et al.A comparison of low-molecular-
weight heparin with unfractionated heparin for unstable
coronary artery disease. Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous
Enoxaparin in Non-Q-Wave Coronary Events Study Group.
New England Journal of Medicine 1997;337(7):447–52.
EUROPA 2003
Fox KM. Efficacy of perindopril in reduction of
cardiovascular events among patients with stable coronary
artery disease: randomised, double-blind, placebo-
controlled, multicentre trial (the EUROPA study). Lancet
2003;362(9386):782–8.
Fox 2005
Fox KA, Poole-Wilson P, Clayton TC, Henderson RA, Shaw
TR, Wheatley DJ, et al.5-year outcome of an interventional
strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: the
British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial. Lancet
2005;366(9489):914–20.
Fox 2006
Fox KA, Dabbous OH, Goldberg RJ, Pieper KS, Eagle
KA, Van de Werf F, et al.Prediction of risk of death and
myocardial infarction in the six months after presentation
with acute coronary syndrome: prospective multinational
observational study (GRACE). BMJ 2006;333(7587):
1091–4.
Fox 2007a
Fox KA, Anderson FA Jr, Dabbous OH, Steg PG, Lopez-
Sendon J, Van de Werf F, et al.Intervention in acute
coronary syndromes: do patients undergo intervention on
the basis of their risk characteristics? The Global Registry
of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE). Heart 2007;93(2):
177–82.
Fox 2007b
Fox KA, Steg PG, Eagle KA, Goodman SG, Anderson FA
Jr, Granger CB, et al.Decline in rates of death and heart
24Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
failure in acute coronary syndromes, 1999-2006. JAMA
2007;297(17):1892–900.
Franklin 2004
Franklin K, Goldberg RJ, Spencer F, Klein W, Budaj A,
Brieger D, et al.Implications of diabetes in patients with
acute coronary syndromes. The Global Registry of Acute
Coronary Events. Archives of Internal Medicine 2004;164
(13):1457–63.
Galvani 1997
Galvani M, Ottani F, Ferrini D, Ladenson JH, Destro A,
Baccos D, et al.Prognostic influence of elevated values
of cardiac troponin I in patients with unstable angina.
Circulation 1997;95(8):2053–9.
Garcia 2004
Garcia S, Canoniero M, Peter A, de Marchena E, Ferreira A.
Correlation of TIMI risk score with angiographic severity
and extent of coronary artery disease in patients with non-
ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes. American Journal
of Cardiology 2004;93(7):813–6.
Gibson 1986
Gibson RS, Boden WE, Theroux P, Strauss HD, Pratt
CM, Gheorghiade M, et al.Diltiazem and reinfarction in
patients with non-Q-wave myocardial infarction. Results of
a double-blind, randomized, multicenter trial. New England
Journal of Medicine 1986;315(7):423–9.
Glaser 2002
Glaser R, Herrmann HC, Murphy SA, Demopoulos LA,
DiBattiste PM, Cannon CP, et al.Benefit of an early invasive
management strategy in women with acute coronary
syndromes. JAMA 2002;288(24):3124–9.
Goldberg 2005
Goldberg RJ, Currie K, White K, Brieger D, Steg PG,
Goodman SG, et al.Six-month outcomes in a multinational
registry of patients hospitalized with an acute coronary
syndrome (the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events
[GRACE]). American Journal of Cardiology 2005;93(3):
288–93.
Goncalves 2005
de Araujo Goncalves P, Ferreira J, Aguiar C, Seabra-Gomes
R. TIMI, PURSUIT, and GRACE risk scores: sustained
prognostic value and interaction with revascularization in
NSTE-ACS. European Heart Journal 2005;26(9):865–72.
Gottlieb 1986
Gottlieb SO, Weisfeldt ML, Ouyang P, Achuff SC,
Baughman KL, Traill TA, et al.Effect of the addition of
propranolol to therapy with nifedipine for unstable angina
pectoris: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled
trial. Circulation 1986;73(2):331–7.
Goyal 2002
Goyal A, Samaha FF, Boden WE, Wade MJ, Kimmel
SE. Stress test criteria used in the conservative arm of the
FRISC-II trial underdetects surgical coronary artery disease
when applied to patients in the VANQWISH trial. Journal
of the American College of Cardiology 2002;39(10):1601–7.
Gurfinkel 1995
Gurfinkel EP, Manos EJ, Mejail RI, Cerda MA, Duronto
EA, Garcia CN, et al.Low molecular weight heparin versus
regular heparin or aspirin in the treatment of unstable
angina and silent ischemia. Journal of the American College
of Cardiology 1995;26(2):313–8.
Hamm 1999
Hamm CW, Heeschen C, Goldmann B, Vahanian A, Adgey
J, Miguel CM, et al.Benefit of abciximab in patients with
refractory unstable angina in relation to serum troponin
T levels. c7E3 Fab Antiplatelet Therapy in Unstable
Refractory Angina (CAPTURE) Study Investigators. New
England Journal of Medicine 1999;340(21):1623–9.
Heeschen 1999a
Heeschen C, van Den Brand MJ, Hamm CW, Simoons
ML. Angiographic findings in patients with refractory
unstable angina according to troponin T status. Circulation
1999;100(14):1509–14.
Heeschen 1999b
Heeschen C, Hamm CW, Goldmann B, Deu A,
Langenbrink L, White HD. Troponin concentrations for
stratification of patients with acute coronary syndromes in
relation to therapeutic efficacy of tirofiban. PRISM Study
Investigators. Platelet Receptor Inhibition in Ischemic
Syndrome Management. Lancet 1999;354(9192):1757–62.
Higgins 2003
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG.
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327
(7414):557–60.
Hirsch 2007
Hirsch A, Windhausen F, Tijssen JG, Verheugt FW, Cornel
JH, de Winter RJ. Long-term outcome after an early
invasive versus selective invasive treatment strategy in
patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome
and elevated cardiac troponin T (the ICTUS trial): a follow-
up study. Lancet 2007;369(9564):827–35.
Hjalmarson 1982
Hjalmarson A, Elmfeldt D, Herlitz J, Holmberg S, Malek I,
Ryden L, et al.Effect on mortality of metoprolol in acute
myocardial infarction. A randomized double-blind trial
[Effekt von metoprolol auf die mortalitat beim akuten
myokardinfarkt]. Munchener Medizinische Wochenschrift
1982;124(1):32–45.
Hochman 1999
Hochman JS, Tamis JE, Thompson TD, Weaver WD,
White HD, Van de Werf F, et al.Sex, clinical presentation,
and outcome in patients with acute coronary syndromes.
Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary
Arteries in Acute Coronary Syndromes IIb Investigators.
New England Journal of Medicine 1999;341(4):226–32.
Hoenig 2006
Hoenig MR, Doust JA, Aroney CN, Scott IA. Early
invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina
& non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era.
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 3.
[DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004815.pub2]
25Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Holmvang 2003
Holmvang L, Clemmensen P, Lindahl B, Lagerqvist B,
Venge P, Wagner G, et al.Quantitative analysis of the
admission electrocardiogram identifies patients with
unstable coronary artery disease who benefit the most from
early invasive treatment. Journal of the American College of
Cardiology 2003;41(6):905–15.
HOPE 2000
Yusuf S, Sleight P, Pogue J, Bosch J, Davies R, Dagenais
G. Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor,
ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. The
Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators.
New England Journal of Medicine 2000;342(3):145–53.
Januzzi 2005
Januzzi JL Jr, Buros J, Cannon CP. Peripheral arterial disease,
acute coronary syndromes, and early invasive management:
the TACTICS TIMI 18 trial. Clinical Cardioloy 2005;28
(5):238–42.
Janzon 2004
Janzon M, Levin LA, Swahn E. Invasive treatment in
unstable coronary artery disease promotes health-related
quality of life: results from the FRISC II trial. American
Heart Journal 2004;148(1):114–21.
Jernberg 2003
Jernberg T, Lindahl B, Siegbahn A, Andren B, Frostfeldt G,
Lagerqvist B, et al.N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide
in relation to inflammation, myocardial necrosis, and the
effect of an invasive strategy in unstable coronary artery
disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2003;
42(11):1909–16.
Jernberg 2004
Jernberg T, James S, Lindahl B, Johnston N, Stridsberg M,
Venge P, et al.Natriuretic peptides in unstable coronary
artery disease. European Heart Journal 2004;25(17):
1486–93.
Johnston 2006
Johnston N, Jernberg T, Lagerqvist B, Wallentin L. Early
invasive treatment benefits patients with renal dysfunction
in unstable coronary artery disease. American Heart Journal
2006;152(6):1052–8.
Kandzari 2005
Kandzari DE, Roe MT, Chen AY, Lytle BL, Pollack CV Jr,
Harrington RA, et al.Influence of clinical trial enrollment
on the quality of care and outcomes for patients with non-
ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. American
Heart Journal 2005;149(3):474–81.
Karvouni 2003
Karvouni E, Katritsis DG, Ioannidis JP. Intravenous
glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists reduce mortality
after percutaneous coronary interventions. Journal of the
American College of Cardiology 2003;41(1):26–32.
Khot 2003
Khot UN, Jia G, Moliterno DJ, Lincoff AM, Khot
MB, Harrington RA, et al.Prognostic importance of
physical examination for heart failure in non-ST-elevation
acute coronary syndromes: the enduring value of Killip
classification. JAMA 2003;290(16):2174–81.
Kim 2005
Kim J, Henderson RA, Pocock SJ, Clayton T, Sculpher MJ,
Fox KA. Health-related quality of life after interventional
or conservative strategy in patients with unstable angina
or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: one-
year results of the third Randomized Intervention Trial of
unstable Angina (RITA-3). Journal of the American College
of Cardiology 2005;45(2):221–8.
Kugelmass 2006
Kugelmass AD, Sadanandan S, Lakkis N, Dibattiste PM,
Robertson DH, Demopoulos LA, et al.Early invasive
strategy improves outcomes in patients with acute coronary
syndrome with previous coronary artery bypass graft
surgery: a report from TACTICS-TIMI 18. Critical
Pathways in Cardiology 2006;5(3):167–72.
Lagerqvist 2001
Lagerqvist B, Safstrom K, Stahle E, Wallentin L, Swahn E. Is
early invasive treatment of unstable coronary artery disease
equally effective for both women and men? FRISC II Study
Group Investigators. Journal of the American College of
Cardiology 2001;38(1):41–8.
Lagerqvist 2005
Lagerqvist B, Diderholm E, Lindahl B, Husted S, Kontny F,
Stahle E, et al.FRISC score for selection of patients for an
early invasive treatment strategy in unstable coronary artery
disease. Heart 2005;91(8):1047–52.
Lagerqvist 2006
Lagerqvist B, Husted S, Kontny F, Stahle E, Swahn E,
Wallentin L. 5-year outcomes in the FRISC-II randomised
trial of an invasive versus a non-invasive strategy in non-
ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: a follow-up study.
Lancet 2006;368(9540):998–1004.
Lee 2008
Lee CH, Tan M, Yan AT, Yan RT, Fitchett D, Grima EA,
et al.Use of cardiac catheterization for non-ST-segment
elevation acute coronary syndromes according to initial risk:
reasons why physicians choose not to refer their patients.
Archives of Internal Medicine 2008;168(3):291–6.
Lewis 1983
Lewis HD Jr, Davis JW, Archibald DG, Steinke WE,
Smitherman TC, Doherty JE 3rd, et al.Protective effects of
aspirin against acute myocardial infarction and death in men
with unstable angina. Results of a Veterans Administration
Cooperative Study. New England Journal of Medicine 1983;
309(7):396–403.
Lindahl 1996
Lindahl B, Venge P, Wallentin L. Relation between
troponin T and the risk of subsequent cardiac events in
unstable coronary artery disease. The FRISC study group.
Circulation 1996;93(9):1651–7.
Magid 2000
Magid DJ, Calonge BN, Rumsfeld JS, Canto JG, Frederick
PD, Every NR, et al.Relation between hospital primary
26Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
angioplasty volume and mortality for patients with acute MI
treated with primary angioplasty vs thrombolytic therapy.
JAMA 2000;284(24):3131–8.
Mahoney 2002
Mahoney EM, Jurkovitz CT, Chu H, Becker ER, Culler
S, Kosinski AS, et al.Cost and cost-effectiveness of an
early invasive vs conservative strategy for the treatment of
unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial
infarction. JAMA 2002;288(15):1851–8.
Mega 2005
Mega JL, Morrow DA, Sabatine MS, Zhao XQ, Snapinn
SM, DiBattiste PM, et al.Correlation between the TIMI
risk score and high-risk angiographic findings in non-ST-
elevation acute coronary syndromes: observations from
the Platelet Receptor Inhibition in Ischemic Syndrome
Management in Patients Limited by Unstable Signs and
Symptoms (PRISM-PLUS) trial. American Heart Journal
2005;149(5):846–50.
Mehta 2005
Mehta SR, Cannon CP, Fox KA, Wallentin L, Boden WE,
Spacek R, et al.Routine vs selective invasive strategies in
patients with acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative
meta-analysis of randomized trials. JAMA 2005;293(23):
2908–17.
Mehta 2008
Mehta SR, Boden WE, Eikelboom JW, Flather M, Steg PG,
Avezum A, et al.Antithrombotic therapy with fondaparinux
in relation to interventional management strategy in patients
with ST- and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary
syndromes: an individual patient-level combined analysis
of the Fifth and Sixth Organization to Assess Strategies in
Ischemic Syndromes (OASIS 5 and 6) randomized trials.
Circulation 2008;118(20):2038–46.
Montelascot 2003
Montalescot G, Van de Werf F, Gulba DC, Avezum A,
Brieger D, Kennelly BM, et al.Stenting and glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa inhibition in patients with acute myocardial
infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention:
findings from the global registry of acute coronary events
(GRACE). Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
2003;60(3):360–7.
Morrow 2001
Morrow DA, Cannon CP, Rifai N, Frey MJ, Vicari R,
Lakkis N, et al.Ability of minor elevations of troponins I
and T to predict benefit from an early invasive strategy
in patients with unstable angina and non-ST elevation
myocardial infarction: results from a randomized trial.
JAMA 2001;286(19):2405–12.
Morrow 2002
Morrow DA, Antman EM, Snapinn SM, McCabe CH,
Theroux P, Braunwald E. An integrated clinical approach to
predicting the benefit of tirofiban in non-ST elevation acute
coronary syndromes. Application of the TIMI Risk Score
for UA/NSTEMI in PRISM-PLUS. European Heart Journal
2002;23(3):223–9.
Morrow 2003
Morrow DA, de Lemos JA, Sabatine MS, Murphy SA,
Demopoulos LA, DiBattiste PM, et al.Evaluation of B-type
natriuretic peptide for risk assessment in unstable angina/
non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: B-type natriuretic
peptide and prognosis in TACTICS-TIMI 18. Journal of
the American College of Cardiology 2003;41(8):1264–72.
Muller 1984
Muller JE, Turi ZG, Pearle DL, Schneider JF, Serfas DH,
Morrison J, et al.Nifedipine and conventional therapy
for unstable angina pectoris: a randomized, double-blind
comparison. Circulation 1984;69(4):728–39.
Neri Serneri 1990
Neri Serneri GG, Gensini GF, Poggesi L, Trotta F, Modesti
PA, Boddi M, et al.Effect of heparin, aspirin, or alteplase
in reduction of myocardial ischaemia in refractory unstable
angina. Lancet 1990;335(8690):615–8.
Norhammar 2004
Norhammar A, Malmberg K, Diderholm E, Lagerqvist B,
Lindahl B, Rydén L, et al.Diabetes mellitus: the major
risk factor in unstable coronary artery disease even after
consideration of the extent of coronary artery disease and
benefits of revascularization. Journal of the American College
of Cardiology 2004;43(4):585–91.
Oliveira 2007
Oliveira GB, Avezum A, Anderson FA Jr, Budaj A, Dabbous
OH, Goodman SG, et al.Use of proven therapies in non-
ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes according to
evidence-based risk stratification. American Heart Journal
2007;153(4):493–9.
Pepine 1998
Pepine CJ, Faich G, Makuch R. Verapamil use in patients
with cardiovascular disease: an overview of randomized
trials. Clinical Cardiology 1998;21(9):633–41.
PRISM-PLUS 1998
Bazzino O, Barrero C, Garre L, Sosa A, Aylward P, Slany
J, et al.Inhibition of the platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor with tirofiban in unstable angina and non-Q-
wave myocardial infarction. Platelet Receptor Inhibition
in Ischemic Syndrome Management in Patients Limited
by Unstable Signs and Symptoms (PRISM-PLUS) Study
Investigators. New England Journal of Medicine 1998;338
(21):1488–97.
PURSUIT 1998
Topol E, Califf R, Simoons M, Diaz R, Paolasso E, Klein
W, et al.Inhibition of platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa with
eptifibatide in patients with acute coronary syndromes.
The PURSUIT Trial Investigators. Platelet Glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa in Unstable Angina: Receptor Suppression Using
Integrilin Therapy. New England Journal of Medicine 1998;
339(7):436–43.
Qayyum 2008
Qayyum R, Khalid MR, Adomaityte J, Papadakos SP,
Messineo FC. Systematic review: comparing routine and
selective invasive strategies for the acute coronary syndrome.
Annals of Internal Medicine 2008;148(3):186–96.
27Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Rihal 2003
Rihal CS, Raco DL, Gersh BJ, Yusuf S. Indications for
coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary
intervention in chronic stable angina: review of the evidence
and methodological considerations. Circulation 2003;108
(20):2439–45.
RISC 1990
The RISC Group. Risk of myocardial infarction and death
during treatment with low dose aspirin and intravenous
heparin in men with unstable coronary artery disease. The
RISC Group. Lancet 1990;336(8719):827–30.
Rodrigues 2003
Rodrigues EJ, Eisenberg MJ, Pilote L, Rodrigues
EJ, Eisenberg MJ, Pilote L. Effects of early and late
administration of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors
on mortality after myocardial infarction. American Journal
of Medicine 2003;115(6):473–9.
Roffi 2002
Roffi M, Chew DP, Mukherjee D, Bhatt DL, White JA,
Moliterno DJ, et al.Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition
in acute coronary syndromes. Gradient of benefit related to
the revascularization strategy. European Heart Journal 2002;
23(18):1441–8.
Rosamond 2008
Rosamond W, Flegal K, Furie K, Go A, Greenlund K, Haase
N, et al.Heart disease and stroke statistics--2008 update:
a report from the American Heart Association Statistics
Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation
2008;117(4):e25–146.
Rott 2001
Rott D, Behar S, Leor J, Hod H, Boyko V, Mandelzweig
L, et al.Effect on survival of acute myocardial infarction in
Killip classes II or III patients undergoing invasive coronary
procedures. American Journal of Cardiology 2001;88(6):
618–23.
Sabatine 2004
Sabatine MS, Morrow DA, Giugliano RP, Murphy SA,
Demopoulos LA, DiBattiste PM, et al.Implications of
upstream glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition and coronary
artery stenting in the invasive management of unstable
angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a
comparison of the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction
(TIMI) IIIB trial and the Treat angina with Aggrastat and
determine Cost of Therapy with Invasive or Conservative
Strategy (TACTICS)-TIMI 18 trial. Circulation 2004;109
(7):874–80.
Sabatine 2006
Sabatine MS, Morrow DA, McCabe CH, Antman EM,
Gibson CM, Cannon CP. Combination of quantitative ST
deviation and troponin elevation provides independent
prognostic and therapeutic information in unstable angina
and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. American
Heart Journal 2006;151(1):25–31.
Sadanandan 2004
Sadanandan S, Cannon CP, Chekuri K, Murphy SA,
Dibattiste PM, Morrow DA, et al.Association of elevated B-
type natriuretic peptide levels with angiographic findings
among patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment
elevation myocardial infarction. Journal of the American
College of Cardiology 2004;44(3):564–8.
Scirica 2002
Scirica BM, Cannon CP, Antman EM, Murphy SA, Morrow
DA, Sabatine MS, et al.Validation of the thrombolysis in
myocardial infarction (TIMI) risk score for unstable angina
pectoris and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the
TIMI III registry. American Journal of Cardiology 2002;90
(3):303–5.
SHOCK 1999
Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, Sanborn TA,
White HD, Talley JD, et al.Early revascularization in
acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic
shock. SHOCK Investigators. Should We Emergently
Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock.
New England Journal of Medicine 1999;341(9):625–34.
Simoons 2001
Simoons ML. Effect of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor blocker
abciximab on outcome in patients with acute coronary
syndromes without early coronary revascularisation: the
GUSTO IV-ACS randomised trial. Lancet 2001;357
(9272):1915–24.
Singh 2000
Singh M, Rihal CS, Berger PB, Bell MR, Grill DE, Garratt
KN, et al.Improving outcome over time of percutaneous
coronary interventions in unstable angina. Journal of the
American college of Cardiology 2000;36(3):674–8.
Stone 2006
Stone GW, McLaurin BT, Cox DA, Bertrand ME, Lincoff
AM, Moses JW, et al.Bivalirudin for patients with acute
coronary syndromes. New England Journal of Medicine
2006;355(21):2203–16.
Stone 2007
Stone GW, White HD, Ohman EM, Bertrand ME,
Lincoff AM, McLaurin BT, et al.Bivalirudin in patients
with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous
coronary intervention: a subgroup analysis from the Acute
Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage strategy
(ACUITY) trial. Lancet 2007;369(9565):907–19.
Tarantini 2007
Tarantini G, Razzolini R, Ramondo A, Napodano M,
Manica A, Favaretto E, et al.Patient risk profile and benefit
from an invasive approach in the initial management
of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.
Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine 2007;8(10):799–802.
Theroux 1985
Theroux P, Taeymans Y, Morissette D, Bosch X, Pelletier
GB, Waters DD. A randomized study comparing
propranolol and diltiazem in the treatment of unstable
angina. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 1985;5
(3):717–22.
28Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Theroux 1988
Theroux P, Ouimet H, McCans J, Latour JG, Joly P, Levy G,
et al.Aspirin, heparin, or both to treat acute unstable angina.
New England Journal of Medicine 1988;319(17):1105–11.
Theroux 1993
Theroux P, Waters D, Qiu S, McCans J, de Guise P, Juneau
M. Aspirin versus heparin to prevent myocardial infarction
during the acute phase of unstable angina. Circulation
1993;88(5 Pt 1):2045–8.
Thompson 2005
Thompson SG, Higgins JP. Treating individuals 4: can
meta-analysis help target interventions at individuals most
likely to benefit?. Lancet 2005;365(9456):341–6.
Thygesen 2007
Thygesen K, Alpert JS, White HD, Jaffe AS, Apple
FS, Galvani M, et al.Universal definition of myocardial
infarction. Circulation 2007;116(22):2634–53.
Tijssen 1987
Tijssen JG, Lubsen J. Nifedipine and metoprolol in
unstable angina: findings from the Holland Interuniversity
Nifedipine/Metoprolol Trial (HINT). Journal of
Cardiovascular Pharmacology 1987;10 Suppl 2:15-22;
discussion 23-4.
TIMACS 2008
Mehta SR. Timing of Intervention in Patients with
Acute Coronary Syndromes (TIMACS). Presented at the
American Heart Association Scientific Sessions. 2008.
TIMI 11B 1999
Antman EM, McCabe CH, Gurfinkel EP, Turpie AG,
Bernink PJ, Salein D, et al.Enoxaparin prevents death
and cardiac ischemic events in unstable angina/non-Q-
wave myocardial infarction. Results of the thrombolysis in
myocardial infarction (TIMI) 11B trial. Circulation 1999;
100(15):1593–601.
TIMI-IIIA 1993
Braunwald E, Muller JE, McCabe CH, Knatterud GL,
Thompson B, Prior MJ, et al.Early effects of tissue-type
plasminogen activator added to conventional therapy on
the culprit coronary lesion in patients presenting with
ischemic cardiac pain at rest. Results of the Thrombolysis in
Myocardial Ischemia (TIMI IIIA) Trial. Circulation 1993;
87(1):38–52.
Topol 1999
Topol EJ, Byzova TV, Plow EF. Platelet GPIIb-IIIa blockers.
Lancet 1999;353(9148):227–31.
TRITON-TIMI 38 2007
Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, Montalescot G,
Ruzyllo W, Gottlieb S, et al.Prasugrel versus clopidogrel
in patients with acute coronary syndromes. New England
Journal of Medicine 2007;357(20):2001–15.
Van de Werf 2005
Van de Werf F, Gore JM, Avezum A, Gulba DC, Goodman
SG, Budaj A, et al.Access to catheterisation facilities
in patients admitted with acute coronary syndrome:
multinational registry study. BMJ 2005;330(7489):441–4.
Weintraub 1999
Weintraub WS, Culler SD, Kosinski A, Becker ER,
Mahoney E, Burnette J, et al.Economics, health-related
quality of life, and cost-effectiveness methods for the
TACTICS (Treat Angina With Aggrastat [tirofiban]] and
Determine Cost of Therapy with Invasive or Conservative
Strategy)-TIMI 18 trial. Amercan Journal of Cardiology
1999;83(3):317–22.
Windhausen 2007a
Windhausen F, Hirsch A, Sanders GT, Cornel JH, Fischer
J, van Straalen JP, et al.N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic
peptide for additional risk stratification in patients with
non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome and an elevated
troponin T: an Invasive versus Conservative Treatment in
Unstable coronary Syndromes (ICTUS) substudy. American
Heart Journal 2007;153(4):485–92.
Windhausen 2007b
Windhausen F, Hirsch A, Tijssen JG, Cornel JH, Verheugt
FW, Klees MI, de Winter RJ. ST-segment deviation on
the admission electrocardiogram, treatment strategy, and
outcome in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes A
substudy of the Invasive versus Conservative Treatment in
Unstable coronary Syndromes (ICTUS) Trial. Journal of
Electrocardiology 2007;40(5):408–15.
Yan 2007
Yan AT, Yan RT, Tan M, Fung A, Cohen EA, Fitchett DH,
et al.Management patterns in relation to risk stratification
among patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary
syndromes. Archives of Internal Medicine 2007;167(10):
1009–16.
Yusuf 1988
Yusuf S, Wittes J, Friedman L. Overview of results of
randomized clinical trials in heart disease. II. Unstable
angina, heart failure, primary prevention with aspirin, and
risk factor modification. JAMA 1988;260(15):2259–63.
Yusuf 1994
Yusuf S, Zucker D, Peduzzi P, Fisher LD, Takaro T, Kennedy
JW, et al.Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery
on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised
trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists
Collaboration. Lancet 1994;344(8922):563–70.
Zaacks 1999
Zaacks SM, Liebson PR, Calvin JE, Parrillo JE, Klein LW.
Unstable angina and non-Q wave myocardial infarction:
does the clinical diagnosis have therapeutic implications?.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology 1999;33(1):
107–18.∗ Indicates the major publication for the study
29Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S O F S T U D I E S
Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]
FRISC-II
Methods randomization: an independent organization randomized patients using telefax
blinding: non-blinded
selection bias, intention-to-treat analysis: 9.7% lost to follow up at five years; intention-to-treat analysis used
Participants 2457 patients with anginal pain within the last 48 hours and ST depression or elevated cardiac markers
overall impression of patient risk level: intermediate-high
Interventions conservative arm: aspirin, beta blocker, statin, ACEI, dalteparin or UFH
invasive arm: as above and routine angiography (average time to angiography: 4d). 10% glycoprotein 2b/3a receptor
antagonist use
Outcomes death all causes (6, 12, 24 months, 5 years), MI (6, 12, 24 months, 5 years), refractory angina (6 months), death
or non-fatal MI (6, 12, 24 months, 5 years), rehospitalization (6 weeks, 6 , 12 months), procedural MI, bleeding,
contrast allergy
Notes
ICTUS
Methods randomization: centralized system; randomized by telephone
blinding: end-points were adjudicated by a blinded committee
selection bias, intention-to-treat analysis: five patients lost to follow up; intention-to-treat analysis used
Participants 1200 patients with accelerating angina or angina at rest in the preceding 24 hours and an elevated cardiac troponin T
>0.3 µg/litre AND either ischemic ECG changes OR documented history of CAD (previous catheterization, history
of myocardial infarction or positive exercise test)
Overall impression on level of risk in patients: high risk; all patients had a positive troponin test on randomization
Interventions conservative arm: aspirin, enoxaparin, statin, clopidogrel
invasive arm: as above, abciximab and routine angiography (median time to angiography: 23 hours) post-random-
ization. 94% glycoprotein 2b/3a receptor antagonist use
Outcomes death all causes (1, 3, 4 years), MI (1, 3 year), rehospitalization (1, 3 years)
Notes
30Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
RITA-3
Methods randomization: central telephone service
blinding: open
selection bias, intention-to-treat analysis: all patients accounted for at 2 years; intention-to-treat analysis used. While
99.8% of patients were followed up for at least 3 years, this figure was 59% at 5 years
Participants 1810 patients with chest pain within the last 72 hours, a documented history of coronary artery disease (CAD) and
one of the following: ischemic ECG changes or Q waves suggesting previous MI or proven CAD on angiogram.
Excluded those with probable evolving MI or those with elevated enzymes (2x) before randomization.
Overall impression on level of risk in patients: Intermediate
Interventions conservative arm: aspirin, beta blocker, enoxaparin
invasive arm: as above and routine angiography (median time to angiography: 2days). 25% glycoprotein 2b/3a
receptor antagonist use
Outcomes death all causes (4, 12, 24 months, 5 years), MI (4, 12, 24 months, 5 years), refractory angina (4,12 mo), death or
non-fatal MI (4, 12, 24 months, 5 years), procedural bleeding & MI
Notes
TACTICS-TIMI 18
Methods randomization: centralized system
blinding: end points were adjudicated by a blinded committee
selection bias, intention-to-treat analysis: all patients accounted for by end of trial; intention-to-treat analysis used
Participants 2220 patients with angina (accelerating or prolonged) at rest in preceding 24 hours & at least one of the following:
ischemic ECG changes, elevated cardiac markers or documented CAD (previous catheterization, revasc or MI)
Overall impression on level of risk in patients:variable; sub analyses reported on TIMI risk score and troponin status
Interventions conservative arm: aspirin, beta blocker, UFH, tirofiban, statin
invasive arm: as above and routine angiography (median time to angiography: 22hours). 94% glycoprotein 2b/3a
receptor antagonist use
Outcomes death all causes (30 days, 6 months), refractory angina (6 months), death or MI (30 days, 6 months), rehospitalization
(30 days, 6 months)
Notes
VINO
Methods randomization: sealed envelopes
blinding: open
selection bias, intention-to-treat analysis: all patients accounted for by end of trial; intention-to-treat analysis used
Participants 131 patients with ischemic chest pain lasting more than 20 minutes (within the preceding 24 hours) + ECG changes
+ elevated cardiac markers
Overall impression on level of risk in patients: high; all patients were cardiac biomarker positive
31Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
VINO (Continued)
Interventions conservative arm: aspirin, beta blocker, UFH,
invasive arm: as above & routine angiography (average time to angiography: 6.2hours). 0% glycoprotein 2b/3a
receptor antagonist use
Outcomes death all causes (30 days, 6 months), MI (30 days, 6 months), death or non-fatal MI (30 days, 6 months), rehospi-
talization (30 days, 6 months)
Notes
Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]
Study Reason for exclusion
Eisenberg 2005 This trial included patients with STEMI and while index and late death are reported, outcomes for UA/
NSTEMI are not reported separately. Also, this was a trial of 88 patients where the primary end-points related
to quality of life
GUSTO2b 2003 This was a post-hoc analysis from a trial designed to compare hirudin to heparin in UA/NSTEMI patients
MATE 1998 This trial was undertaken in the pre-stent era & included patients with STEMI
MITI 2000 This was not a randomized clinical trial. The data are extracted from a registry
Neumann 2003 This trial included UA/NSTEMI patients that were all due to have angiography. This trial compared 2 invasive
strategies depending on whether angiography was undertaken at <6hours or at 3-5 days. Hence, this trial
compared two different invasive strategies i.e. early or delayed invasive and is not appropriate for this review
TIMI-3b 1995 This trial was undertaken in the pre-stent era.
TRUCS 2000 This trial was deemed inappropriate to this review since the patients included were admitted with recurrent
angina 48 hours after the index case of unstable angina. Hence, the patients in this trial had all been managed
conservatively for at least 48 hours after their index chest pain & had to suffer another bout of angina before
randomization was considered. Studies included in this review require that patients are randomized at index
presentation. This study, by definition, only considered patients with Braunwald class IIIb or IIIc unstable
angina and is therefore dissimilar enough from the included studies to warrant exclusion
VANQWISH 1998 This trial was undertaken in the pre-stent era and included patients treated with thrombolysis
Zhao 2005 This study doesn’t meet this review’s stent requirement.
32Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
D A T A A N D A N A L Y S E S
Comparison 1. All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome or subgroup titleNo. of
studies
No. of
participants Statistical method Effect size
1 Index Death 5 7781 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.53 [0.98, 2.39]
1.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 3383 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.67 [0.84, 3.31]
1.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
3 4398 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.39 [0.65, 2.96]
2 Early Death 3 4161 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.11 [0.66, 1.88]
2.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
1 2220 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.38 [0.76, 2.51]
2.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 1941 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.67 [0.15, 3.02]
3 Intermediate Death 5 7818 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.82 [0.57, 1.19]
3.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 3420 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.95 [0.66, 1.39]
3.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
3 4398 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.67 [0.33, 1.37]
4 Late Death 3 5467 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.90 [0.76, 1.08]
4.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
1 1200 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.11 [0.74, 1.67]
4.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 4267 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.87 [0.72, 1.04]
5 Index Myocardial Infarction 5 7781 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.03 [0.52, 2.03]
5.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 3383 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.67 [0.44, 1.02]
5.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
3 4398 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.43 [0.65, 3.12]
6 Early Myocardial Infarction 3 4161 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.64 [0.38, 1.06]
6.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
1 2220 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.53 [0.35, 0.79]
6.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 1941 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.63 [0.18, 2.17]
7 Intermediate Myocardial
Infarction
5 7818 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.73 [0.62, 0.86]
7.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 3420 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.72 [0.54, 0.96]
7.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
3 4398 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.72 [0.52, 0.98]
8 Late Myocardial Infarction 3 5467 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.78 [0.67, 0.92]
8.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
1 1200 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.01 [0.66, 1.55]
8.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 4267 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.75 [0.63, 0.90]
9 Index Death or Non-Fatal MI 4 6618 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.14 [0.59, 2.21]
33Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
9.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
1 2220 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.77 [0.51, 1.17]
9.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
3 4398 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.46 [0.75, 2.86]
10 Early Death or Non-Fatal MI 2 2351 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.64 [0.45, 0.92]
10.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
1 2220 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.67 [0.48, 0.94]
10.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
1 131 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.30 [0.06, 1.39]
11 Intermediate Death or
Non-Fatal MI
4 6618 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.76 [0.62, 0.94]
11.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
1 2220 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.77 [0.58, 1.01]
11.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
3 4398 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.74 [0.52, 1.04]
12 Intermediate Death or
Non-Fatal MI; Gender
Sub-Analysis
3 6478 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.73 [0.59, 0.91]
12.1 Male 3 4297 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.68 [0.57, 0.81]
12.2 Female 3 2181 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.79 [0.48, 1.31]
13 Late Death or Non-Fatal MI 3 5467 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.89 [0.73, 1.08]
13.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
1 1200 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.19 [0.87, 1.63]
13.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 4267 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.81 [0.72, 0.92]
14 Intermediate Refractory Angina 4 7687 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.67 [0.55, 0.83]
14.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 3420 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.82 [0.49, 1.38]
14.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 4267 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.57 [0.50, 0.64]
15 Intermediate Rehospitalization 4 6008 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.67 [0.61, 0.74]
15.1 Routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 3420 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.77 [0.63, 0.93]
15.2 No routine glycoprotein
IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
2 2588 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.65 [0.59, 0.71]
Comparison 2. Safety end-points
Outcome or subgroup titleNo. of
studies
No. of
participants Statistical method Effect size
1 Procedure-related MI 3 5467 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 2.00 [1.53, 2.61]
2 Bleeding 3 6487 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 1.71 [1.27, 2.31]
3 Stroke 2 4677 Risk Ratio (M-H, Random, 95% CI) 0.89 [0.34, 2.31]
34Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 1 Index Death.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 1 Index Death
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
ICTUS 6/586 5/577 14.4 % 1.18 [ 0.36, 3.85 ]
TACTICS-TIMI 18 16/1114 8/1106 28.1 % 1.99 [ 0.85, 4.62 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1700 1683 42.5 % 1.67 [ 0.84, 3.31 ]
Total events: 22 (Invasive), 13 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 0.49, df = 1 (P = 0.48); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.46 (P = 0.15)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
FRISC-II 13/1222 11/1235 31.4 % 1.19 [ 0.54, 2.66 ]
RITA-3 14/895 6/915 22.1 % 2.39 [ 0.92, 6.18 ]
VINO 1/64 3/67 4.0 % 0.35 [ 0.04, 3.27 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 2181 2217 57.5 % 1.39 [ 0.65, 2.96 ]
Total events: 28 (Invasive), 20 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.14; Chi2 = 2.83, df = 2 (P = 0.24); I2 =29%
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.85 (P = 0.40)
Total (95% CI) 3881 3900 100.0 % 1.53 [ 0.98, 2.39 ]
Total events: 50 (Invasive), 33 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 3.43, df = 4 (P = 0.49); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.85 (P = 0.064)
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
Invasive Conservative
35Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 2 Early Death.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 2 Early Death
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
TACTICS-TIMI 18 25/1114 18/1106 44.7 % 1.38 [ 0.76, 2.51 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1114 1106 44.7 % 1.38 [ 0.76, 2.51 ]
Total events: 25 (Invasive), 18 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: not applicable
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.05 (P = 0.29)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
RITA-3 26/895 24/915 49.5 % 1.11 [ 0.64, 1.91 ]
VINO 1/64 5/67 5.8 % 0.21 [ 0.03, 1.74 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 959 982 55.3 % 0.67 [ 0.15, 3.02 ]
Total events: 27 (Invasive), 29 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.78; Chi2 = 2.25, df = 1 (P = 0.13); I2 =56%
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.53 (P = 0.60)
Total (95% CI) 2073 2088 100.0 % 1.11 [ 0.66, 1.88 ]
Total events: 52 (Invasive), 47 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.07; Chi2 = 2.87, df = 2 (P = 0.24); I2 =30%
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.38 (P = 0.70)
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
Invasive Conservative
36Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.3. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 3 Intermediate Death.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 3 Intermediate Death
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
ICTUS 15/604 15/596 16.6 % 0.99 [ 0.49, 2.00 ]
TACTICS-TIMI 18 37/1114 39/1106 26.3 % 0.94 [ 0.61, 1.47 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1718 1702 42.9 % 0.95 [ 0.66, 1.39 ]
Total events: 52 (Invasive), 54 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 0.01, df = 1 (P = 0.91); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.24 (P = 0.81)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
FRISC-II 27/1222 48/1235 25.3 % 0.57 [ 0.36, 0.90 ]
RITA-3 41/895 36/915 26.5 % 1.16 [ 0.75, 1.80 ]
VINO 2/64 9/67 5.3 % 0.23 [ 0.05, 1.04 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 2181 2217 57.1 % 0.67 [ 0.33, 1.37 ]
Total events: 70 (Invasive), 93 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.26; Chi2 = 7.54, df = 2 (P = 0.02); I2 =73%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.10 (P = 0.27)
Total (95% CI) 3899 3919 100.0 % 0.82 [ 0.57, 1.19 ]
Total events: 122 (Invasive), 147 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.08; Chi2 = 8.15, df = 4 (P = 0.09); I2 =51%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.05 (P = 0.29)
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
Invasive Conservative
37Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.4. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 4 Late Death.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 4 Late Death
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
ICTUS 45/604 40/596 16.4 % 1.11 [ 0.74, 1.67 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 604 596 16.4 % 1.11 [ 0.74, 1.67 ]
Total events: 45 (Invasive), 40 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: not applicable
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.50 (P = 0.62)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
FRISC-II 117/1222 124/1235 42.0 % 0.95 [ 0.75, 1.21 ]
RITA-3 102/895 132/915 41.6 % 0.79 [ 0.62, 1.01 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 2117 2150 83.6 % 0.87 [ 0.72, 1.04 ]
Total events: 219 (Invasive), 256 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.00; Chi2 = 1.17, df = 1 (P = 0.28); I2 =15%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.50 (P = 0.13)
Total (95% CI) 2721 2746 100.0 % 0.90 [ 0.76, 1.08 ]
Total events: 264 (Invasive), 296 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.00; Chi2 = 2.35, df = 2 (P = 0.31); I2 =15%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.14 (P = 0.25)
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Invasive Conservative
38Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.5. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 5 Index Myocardial Infarction.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 5 Index Myocardial Infarction
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
ICTUS 9/586 9/577 19.4 % 0.98 [ 0.39, 2.46 ]
TACTICS-TIMI 18 27/1114 44/1106 26.2 % 0.61 [ 0.38, 0.98 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1700 1683 45.6 % 0.67 [ 0.44, 1.02 ]
Total events: 36 (Invasive), 53 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 0.83, df = 1 (P = 0.36); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.85 (P = 0.065)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
FRISC-II 68/1222 31/1235 26.9 % 2.22 [ 1.46, 3.36 ]
RITA-3 17/895 15/915 22.9 % 1.16 [ 0.58, 2.31 ]
VINO 0/64 3/67 4.5 % 0.15 [ 0.01, 2.84 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 2181 2217 54.4 % 1.43 [ 0.65, 3.12 ]
Total events: 85 (Invasive), 49 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.26; Chi2 = 5.29, df = 2 (P = 0.07); I2 =62%
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.89 (P = 0.38)
Total (95% CI) 3881 3900 100.0 % 1.03 [ 0.52, 2.03 ]
Total events: 121 (Invasive), 102 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.40; Chi2 = 18.35, df = 4 (P = 0.001); I2 =78%
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.08 (P = 0.93)
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
Invasive Conservative
39Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.6. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 6 Early Myocardial Infarction.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 6 Early Myocardial Infarction
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
TACTICS-TIMI 18 34/1114 64/1106 50.2 % 0.53 [ 0.35, 0.79 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1114 1106 50.2 % 0.53 [ 0.35, 0.79 ]
Total events: 34 (Invasive), 64 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: not applicable
Test for overall effect: Z = 3.08 (P = 0.0021)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
RITA-3 30/895 34/915 44.5 % 0.90 [ 0.56, 1.46 ]
VINO 1/64 5/67 5.4 % 0.21 [ 0.03, 1.74 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 959 982 49.8 % 0.63 [ 0.18, 2.17 ]
Total events: 31 (Invasive), 39 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.46; Chi2 = 1.75, df = 1 (P = 0.19); I2 =43%
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.73 (P = 0.47)
Total (95% CI) 2073 2088 100.0 % 0.64 [ 0.38, 1.06 ]
Total events: 65 (Invasive), 103 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.09; Chi2 = 3.89, df = 2 (P = 0.14); I2 =49%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.73 (P = 0.083)
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Invasive Conservative
40Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.7. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 7 Intermediate Myocardial Infarction.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 7 Intermediate Myocardial Infarction
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
ICTUS 22/604 27/596 9.4 % 0.80 [ 0.46, 1.40 ]
TACTICS-TIMI 18 53/1114 76/1106 24.6 % 0.69 [ 0.49, 0.97 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1718 1702 33.9 % 0.72 [ 0.54, 0.96 ]
Total events: 75 (Invasive), 103 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 0.20, df = 1 (P = 0.65); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 2.21 (P = 0.027)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
FRISC-II 105/1222 143/1235 49.9 % 0.74 [ 0.58, 0.94 ]
RITA-3 34/895 44/915 14.9 % 0.79 [ 0.51, 1.22 ]
VINO 2/64 10/67 1.3 % 0.21 [ 0.05, 0.92 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 2181 2217 66.1 % 0.72 [ 0.52, 0.98 ]
Total events: 141 (Invasive), 197 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.03; Chi2 = 2.89, df = 2 (P = 0.24); I2 =31%
Test for overall effect: Z = 2.07 (P = 0.038)
Total (95% CI) 3899 3919 100.0 % 0.73 [ 0.62, 0.86 ]
Total events: 216 (Invasive), 300 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 3.10, df = 4 (P = 0.54); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 3.66 (P = 0.00026)
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Invasive Conservative
41Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.8. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 8 Late Myocardial Infarction.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 8 Late Myocardial Infarction
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
ICTUS 40/604 39/596 14.8 % 1.01 [ 0.66, 1.55 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 604 596 14.8 % 1.01 [ 0.66, 1.55 ]
Total events: 40 (Invasive), 39 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: not applicable
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.06 (P = 0.96)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
FRISC-II 141/1222 195/1235 66.2 % 0.73 [ 0.60, 0.89 ]
RITA-3 46/895 57/915 18.9 % 0.83 [ 0.57, 1.20 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 2117 2150 85.2 % 0.75 [ 0.63, 0.90 ]
Total events: 187 (Invasive), 252 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 0.31, df = 1 (P = 0.58); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 3.16 (P = 0.0016)
Total (95% CI) 2721 2746 100.0 % 0.78 [ 0.67, 0.92 ]
Total events: 227 (Invasive), 291 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 1.92, df = 2 (P = 0.38); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 2.89 (P = 0.0038)
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Invasive Conservative
42Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.9. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 9 Index Death or Non-Fatal MI.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 9 Index Death or Non-Fatal MI
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
TACTICS-TIMI 18 38/1114 49/1106 31.4 % 0.77 [ 0.51, 1.17 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1114 1106 31.4 % 0.77 [ 0.51, 1.17 ]
Total events: 38 (Invasive), 49 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: not applicable
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.23 (P = 0.22)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
FRISC-II 78/1222 38/1235 32.1 % 2.07 [ 1.42, 3.03 ]
RITA-3 31/895 21/915 28.8 % 1.51 [ 0.87, 2.61 ]
VINO 1/64 6/67 7.8 % 0.17 [ 0.02, 1.41 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 2181 2217 68.6 % 1.46 [ 0.75, 2.86 ]
Total events: 110 (Invasive), 65 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.20; Chi2 = 5.77, df = 2 (P = 0.06); I2 =65%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.11 (P = 0.27)
Total (95% CI) 3295 3323 100.0 % 1.14 [ 0.59, 2.21 ]
Total events: 148 (Invasive), 114 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.31; Chi2 = 15.76, df = 3 (P = 0.001); I2 =81%
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.40 (P = 0.69)
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
Invasive Conservative
43Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.10. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 10 Early Death or Non-Fatal MI.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 10 Early Death or Non-Fatal MI
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
TACTICS-TIMI 18 52/1114 77/1106 94.6 % 0.67 [ 0.48, 0.94 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1114 1106 94.6 % 0.67 [ 0.48, 0.94 ]
Total events: 52 (Invasive), 77 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: not applicable
Test for overall effect: Z = 2.29 (P = 0.022)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
VINO 2/64 7/67 5.4 % 0.30 [ 0.06, 1.39 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 64 67 5.4 % 0.30 [ 0.06, 1.39 ]
Total events: 2 (Invasive), 7 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: not applicable
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.54 (P = 0.12)
Total (95% CI) 1178 1173 100.0 % 0.64 [ 0.45, 0.92 ]
Total events: 54 (Invasive), 84 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.01; Chi2 = 1.02, df = 1 (P = 0.31); I2 =2%
Test for overall effect: Z = 2.42 (P = 0.015)
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Invasive Conservative
44Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.11. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 11 Intermediate Death or Non-Fatal MI.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 11 Intermediate Death or Non-Fatal MI
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
TACTICS-TIMI 18 81/1114 105/1106 30.6 % 0.77 [ 0.58, 1.01 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1114 1106 30.6 % 0.77 [ 0.58, 1.01 ]
Total events: 81 (Invasive), 105 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: not applicable
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.88 (P = 0.060)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
FRISC-II 127/1222 174/1235 39.1 % 0.74 [ 0.60, 0.91 ]
RITA-3 68/895 76/915 26.6 % 0.91 [ 0.67, 1.25 ]
VINO 4/64 15/67 3.7 % 0.28 [ 0.10, 0.80 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 2181 2217 69.4 % 0.74 [ 0.52, 1.04 ]
Total events: 199 (Invasive), 265 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.05; Chi2 = 4.91, df = 2 (P = 0.09); I2 =59%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.74 (P = 0.082)
Total (95% CI) 3295 3323 100.0 % 0.76 [ 0.62, 0.94 ]
Total events: 280 (Invasive), 370 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.02; Chi2 = 4.91, df = 3 (P = 0.18); I2 =39%
Test for overall effect: Z = 2.56 (P = 0.011)
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Invasive Conservative
45Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.12. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 12 Intermediate Death or Non-Fatal MI; Gender Sub-Analysis.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 12 Intermediate Death or Non-Fatal MI; Gender Sub-Analysis
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Male
FRISC-II 84/872 132/834 24.9 % 0.61 [ 0.47, 0.79 ]
RITA-3 38/545 59/583 17.1 % 0.69 [ 0.47, 1.02 ]
TACTICS-TIMI 18 55/719 70/744 19.9 % 0.81 [ 0.58, 1.14 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 2136 2161 61.9 % 0.68 [ 0.57, 0.81 ]
Total events: 177 (Invasive), 261 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 1.80, df = 2 (P = 0.41); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 4.19 (P = 0.000028)
2 Female
FRISC-II 36/344 33/398 14.5 % 1.26 [ 0.80, 1.98 ]
RITA-3 17/350 30/332 10.4 % 0.54 [ 0.30, 0.96 ]
TACTICS-TIMI 18 26/395 35/362 13.2 % 0.68 [ 0.42, 1.11 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1089 1092 38.1 % 0.79 [ 0.48, 1.31 ]
Total events: 79 (Invasive), 98 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.14; Chi2 = 6.16, df = 2 (P = 0.05); I2 =68%
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.91 (P = 0.36)
Total (95% CI) 3225 3253 100.0 % 0.73 [ 0.59, 0.91 ]
Total events: 256 (Invasive), 359 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.03; Chi2 = 9.22, df = 5 (P = 0.10); I2 =46%
Test for overall effect: Z = 2.78 (P = 0.0055)
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Invasive Conservative
46Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.13. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 13 Late Death or Non-Fatal MI.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 13 Late Death or Non-Fatal MI
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
ICTUS 76/604 63/596 23.0 % 1.19 [ 0.87, 1.63 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 604 596 23.0 % 1.19 [ 0.87, 1.63 ]
Total events: 76 (Invasive), 63 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: not applicable
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.09 (P = 0.28)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
FRISC-II 217/1222 270/1235 41.3 % 0.81 [ 0.69, 0.95 ]
RITA-3 142/895 178/915 35.7 % 0.82 [ 0.67, 1.00 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 2117 2150 77.0 % 0.81 [ 0.72, 0.92 ]
Total events: 359 (Invasive), 448 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 0.00, df = 1 (P = 0.98); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 3.23 (P = 0.0012)
Total (95% CI) 2721 2746 100.0 % 0.89 [ 0.73, 1.08 ]
Total events: 435 (Invasive), 511 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.02; Chi2 = 4.87, df = 2 (P = 0.09); I2 =59%
Test for overall effect: Z = 1.20 (P = 0.23)
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Invasive Conservative
47Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.14. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 14 Intermediate Refractory Angina.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 14 Intermediate Refractory Angina
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
ICTUS 85/604 77/596 20.1 % 1.09 [ 0.82, 1.45 ]
TACTICS-TIMI 18 430/1114 660/1106 31.4 % 0.65 [ 0.59, 0.71 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1718 1702 51.6 % 0.82 [ 0.49, 1.38 ]
Total events: 515 (Invasive), 737 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.13; Chi2 = 11.89, df = 1 (P = 0.00057); I2 =92%
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.73 (P = 0.46)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
FRISC-II 256/1222 455/1235 29.4 % 0.57 [ 0.50, 0.65 ]
RITA-3 58/895 106/915 19.1 % 0.56 [ 0.41, 0.76 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 2117 2150 48.4 % 0.57 [ 0.50, 0.64 ]
Total events: 314 (Invasive), 561 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 0.01, df = 1 (P = 0.92); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 9.22 (P < 0.00001)
Total (95% CI) 3835 3852 100.0 % 0.67 [ 0.55, 0.83 ]
Total events: 829 (Invasive), 1298 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.03; Chi2 = 17.12, df = 3 (P = 0.00067); I2 =82%
Test for overall effect: Z = 3.80 (P = 0.00014)
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
Invasive Conservative
48Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 1.15. Comparison 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa
receptor use, Outcome 15 Intermediate Rehospitalization.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 1 All studies undertaken in the stent era regardless of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor use
Outcome: 15 Intermediate Rehospitalization
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
1 Routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
ICTUS 44/604 64/596 6.8 % 0.68 [ 0.47, 0.98 ]
TACTICS-TIMI 18 123/1114 152/1106 17.3 % 0.80 [ 0.64, 1.00 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1718 1702 24.1 % 0.77 [ 0.63, 0.93 ]
Total events: 167 (Invasive), 216 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 0.60, df = 1 (P = 0.44); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 2.72 (P = 0.0065)
2 No routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist use
FRISC-II 451/1222 704/1235 75.3 % 0.65 [ 0.59, 0.71 ]
VINO 4/64 6/67 0.6 % 0.70 [ 0.21, 2.36 ]
Subtotal (95% CI) 1286 1302 75.9 % 0.65 [ 0.59, 0.71 ]
Total events: 455 (Invasive), 710 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 0.01, df = 1 (P = 0.90); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 9.71 (P < 0.00001)
Total (95% CI) 3004 3004 100.0 % 0.67 [ 0.61, 0.74 ]
Total events: 622 (Invasive), 926 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.00; Chi2 = 3.23, df = 3 (P = 0.36); I2 =7%
Test for overall effect: Z = 7.95 (P < 0.00001)
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
Invasive Conservative
49Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 Safety end-points, Outcome 1 Procedure-related MI.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 2 Safety end-points
Outcome: 1 Procedure-related MI
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
FRISC-II 66/1222 36/1235 45.3 % 1.85 [ 1.24, 2.76 ]
ICTUS 72/604 36/596 48.8 % 1.97 [ 1.34, 2.90 ]
RITA-3 15/895 4/915 5.9 % 3.83 [ 1.28, 11.51 ]
Total (95% CI) 2721 2746 100.0 % 2.00 [ 1.53, 2.61 ]
Total events: 153 (Invasive), 76 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 1.50, df = 2 (P = 0.47); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 5.05 (P < 0.00001)
0.1 0.2 0.5 1 2 5 10
Conservative Invasive
Analysis 2.2. Comparison 2 Safety end-points, Outcome 2 Bleeding.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 2 Safety end-points
Outcome: 2 Bleeding
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
FRISC-II 112/1222 81/1235 41.3 % 1.40 [ 1.06, 1.84 ]
RITA-3 73/895 32/915 29.3 % 2.33 [ 1.56, 3.50 ]
TACTICS-TIMI 18 61/1114 36/1106 29.4 % 1.68 [ 1.12, 2.52 ]
Total (95% CI) 3231 3256 100.0 % 1.71 [ 1.27, 2.31 ]
Total events: 246 (Invasive), 149 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.04; Chi2 = 4.22, df = 2 (P = 0.12); I2 =53%
Test for overall effect: Z = 3.53 (P = 0.00042)
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Conservative Invasive
50Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Analysis 2.3. Comparison 2 Safety end-points, Outcome 3 Stroke.
Review: Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era
Comparison: 2 Safety end-points
Outcome: 3 Stroke
Study or subgroup Invasive Conservative Risk Ratio Weight Risk Ratio
n/N n/N
M-H,Random,95%
CI
M-H,Random,95%
CI
FRISC-II 2/1222 3/1235 28.5 % 0.67 [ 0.11, 4.03 ]
TACTICS-TIMI 18 6/1114 6/1106 71.5 % 0.99 [ 0.32, 3.07 ]
Total (95% CI) 2336 2341 100.0 % 0.89 [ 0.34, 2.31 ]
Total events: 8 (Invasive), 9 (Conservative)
Heterogeneity: Tau2 = 0.0; Chi2 = 0.13, df = 1 (P = 0.72); I2 =0.0%
Test for overall effect: Z = 0.24 (P = 0.81)
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Conservative Invasive
A D D I T I O N A L T A B L E S
Table 1. Detailed characteristics of included studies, rates of angiography and revasculization
Study Characteris-
tic
TACTICS-TIMI
18
ICTUS RITA-3 FRISC-II VINO
Year of publication 2001 2005 2002 1999 2001
Total Number of Pa-
tients
2220 1200 1810 2457 131
Stent use in invasive
arm %
83 88 88 61 47
Men % 66 74 62 70 80
Mean Age 62 62 63 65 66
51Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Table 1. Detailed characteristics of included studies, rates of angiography and revasculization (Continued)
Trial Duration 6 months 4 years 5 years 5 years 6 months
Diabetes mellitus % 28 14 13 13 25
Myocardial Infarc-
tion on trial enrol-
ment %
54 100 75 58 100
Previous myocardial
infarction %
29 23 28 23 26
ST depression % 39 48 37 46 47
Mortality in con-
servatively managed
patients at end of
follow up % (note
different trial dura-
tions)
3.5 7.7 14 10.1 13.4
Mortality in con-
servatively managed
patients expressed as
an average mortality
per year of follow up
%/year
7.0 1.9 2.8 2.0 26.8
Myocardial Infarc-
tion rate in con-
servatively managed
patients at end of
follow up % (note
different trial dura-
tions)
6.9 12.3 (as per trial def-
inition)
6.2 17.7 14.9
Glycoprotein 2b/3a
receptor antagonist
use in invasive arm
%
94 94 9 10 0
Revascularization at
end of follow up in-
vasive/conservative
%
61/44 81/58 61/38 80/52 78/39
Difference in revas-
cularization rates at
end of follow up be-
tween the 2 strate-
17 23 23 28 39
52Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Table 1. Detailed characteristics of included studies, rates of angiography and revasculization (Continued)
gies %
Percentage of revas-
cularization proce-
dures in the invasive
group being CABG
%
22 24 42 41 35
Medical Co-Inter-
ventions (% of pa-
tients enrolled)
aspirin: 98; unfrac-
tionated
heparin: 99; beta-
blocker: 82; statin:
52; clopidogrel: 0
(this was a criterion
for exclusion)
aspirin:
100 as per protocol,
enoxaparin: 100 as
per protocol, statin:
92, clopidogrel: 55
aspirin: 92; enaxa-
parin: 84; unfrac-
tionated
heparin: 11; beta-
blocker: 72; calcium
channel antagonist:
35; ACE inhibitor:
18; statin: 45
as-
pirin: 93; dalteparin
50; unfractionated
heparin: 50; beta-
blocker: 79; calcium
channel antagonist:
20; statin: 56
aspirin: 100
as per protocol, hep-
arin: 100 as per pro-
tocol; beta-blocker:
76; calcium channel
antagonist: 9; ACE
inhibitor: 47; statin:
43
Table 2. Definitions of myocardial infarction in the included studies
Study Name Definition for Non-Pro-
cedural Myocardial In-
farction
Definition of Procedural
Myocardial Infarction
More than one definition
of Myocardial Infarction?
Definition of Myocardial
Infarction Used in this Re-
view
RITA-3 Clinical symptoms, ECG
changes and CK-MB or
Toponin >2 x upper limit
of normal greater than
24 hours post-randomiza-
tion
Clinical symptoms, ECG
changes and CK-MB or
Toponin >2 x upper limit
of normal greater than
24 hours post-randomiza-
tion
Yes As per trial definition
ICTUS CK-MB > upper limit of
normal or a 50% decline
from a peak value fol-
lowed by subsequent rise
to a value greater than the
upper limit of normal. An
increased troponin above
the upper limit of normal
was also used beyond one
year of follow up
CK-MB > upper limit
of normal or a 50% de-
cline from a peak value
followed by subsequent
rise to a value greater
than the upper limit of
normal. New Q waves
on the electrocardiogram
were used to define my-
ocardial infarction associ-
ated with coronary artery
bypass grafting
Yes In various publications,
the investigators report
the myocardial infarction
end point as 1. total
myocardial infarction 2.
spontaneous myocardial
infarction and 3. procedu-
ral myocardial infarction.
We utilized spontaneous
myocardial infarction for
our myocardial infarction
end-point, death/sponta-
neous myocardial infarc-
tion for our death or my-
ocardial infarction com-
posite and procedural my-
53Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Table 2. Definitions of myocardial infarction in the included studies (Continued)
ocardial infarction is re-
ported as a safety end
point. Since the prognos-
tic value of peri-procedu-
ral infarctions is still de-
bated, ’spontaneous’ my-
ocardial infarction is our
preferred end point since
this allows for consistency
with the other trials
TACTIC TIMI 18 CK-MB > upper limit of
normal or >50% over pre-
vious
CK-MB > 3 times upper
limit of normal or >50%
over previous
No As per trial definition
VINO Recurrent ischemic chest
pain lasting >20 minutes,
new ECG changes and
CK-MB > 1.5 times the
upper limit of normal af-
ter 72 hours post-ran-
domization
Recurrent ischemic chest
pain lasting >20 minutes,
new ECG changes and
CK-MB > 1.5 times the
upper limit of normal af-
ter 72 hours post-ran-
domization
No As per trial definition
FRISC-II Two or three of the
following criteria: chest
pain, ECG changes or el-
evated markers of my-
ocardial damange. Marker
definitions: CK-MB mass
> upper limit of normal
or CK, CK-B, CK-MB ac-
tivity > 2 times upper limit
of normal in 1 sample of
CK-MB activity > upper
limit of normal in 2 sam-
ples
Two or three of the
following criteria: chest
pain, ECG changes or el-
evated markers of my-
ocardial damange. Marker
definitions: CK-MB mass
> 1.5 times upper limit
of normal or CK, CK-B,
CK-MB activity > 3 times
upper limit of normal in 1
sample of CK-MB activ-
ity > 2 times upper limit
of normal in 2 samples
No As per trial definition
54Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
A P P E N D I C E S
Appendix 1. Search strategies
CENTRAL on The Cochrane Library
#1 MeSH descriptor Angina, Unstable explode all trees
#2 unstable next angina in All Text
#3 coronary next syndrome* in All Text
#4 MeSH descriptor Myocardial Infarction explode all trees
#5 myocardial next infarct* in All Text
#6 heart next infarct* in All Text
#7 nstemi in All Text
#8 unstable next coronary in All Text
#9 (#1 or #2 or #3 or #4 or #5 or #6 or #7 or #8)
#10 (ischaemi* in All Text near/6 guid* in All Text)
#11 (ischemi* in All Text near/6 guid* in All Text)
#12 (early in All Text near/6 invasive in All Text)
#13 (invasive in All Text near/6 conservative in All Text)
#14 (angiography in All Text near/6 invasive in All Text)
#15 (angiography in All Text near/6 conservative in All Text)
#16 (ischemi* in All Text near/6 strateg* in All Text)
#17 (ischaemi* in All Text near/6 strateg* in All Text)
#18 (conservative in All Text near/6 strateg* in All Text)
#19 (conservative in All Text near/6 therap* in All Text)
#20 (conservative in All Text near/6 treatment* in All Text)
#21 (conservative in All Text near/6 management in All Text)
#22 (interventional in All Text near/6 strateg* in All Text)
#23 (interventional in All Text near/6 therap* in All Text)
#24 (interventional in All Text near/6 treatment* in All Text)
#25 (interventional in All Text near/6 management in All Text)
#26 (invasive in All Text near/6 strateg* in All Text)
#27 (invasive in All Text near/6 therap* in All Text)
#28 (invasive in All Text near/6 treatment* in All Text)
#29 (invasive in All Text near/6 management in All Text)
#30 (triage in All Text near/6 angiograph* in All Text)
#31 (#10 or #11 or #12 or #13 or #14 or #15 or #16 or #17 or #18 or #19)
#32 (#20 or #21 or #22 or #23 or #24 or #25 or #26 or #27 or #28 or #29 or #30)
#33 (#31 or #32)
#34 (#9 and #33)
MEDLINE (on Ovid)
1 Myocardial Infarction/
2 exp Angina, Unstable/
3 Acute Coronary Syndrome/
4 unstable angina$.tw.
5 coronary syndrome$.tw.
6 myocardial infarction$.tw.
7 or/1-6
8 (intervention$ adj2 (strateg$ or therapy or therapies or treatment$)).tw.
9 (conservative adj2 (strateg$ or therapy or therapies or treatment$)).tw.
55Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
10 (invasive adj2 (strateg$ or therapy or therapies or treatment$)).tw.
11 8 or 9 or 10
12 7 and 11 (
13 (isch?emia adj2 guide$).tw.
14 ((invasive or conservative) adj2 management).tw.
15 11 or 13 or 14
16 7 and 15
17 randomized controlled trial.pt.
18 controlled clinical trial.pt.
19 Randomized controlled trials/
20 random allocation/
21 double blind method/
22 single-blind method/
23 or/17-22
24 exp animal/ not humans/
25 23 not 24
26 clinical trial.pt.
27 exp Clinical Trials as Topic/
28 (clin$ adj25 trial$).ti,ab.
29 ((singl$ or doubl$ or trebl$ or tripl$) adj (blind$ or mask$)).ti,ab.
30 placebos/
31 placebo$.ti,ab.
32 random$.ti,ab.
33 research design/
34 or/26-33
35 34 not 24
36 35 not 25
37 comparative study.pt.
38 exp evaluation studies/
39 follow up studies/
40 prospective studies/
41 (control$ or prospectiv$ or volunteer$).ti,ab.
42 or/37-41
43 42 not 24
44 43 not (25 or 36)
45 25 or 36 or 44
46 45 and 16
EMBASE (on Ovid)
1 exp heart infarction/
2 exp unstable angina pectoris/
3 Acute Coronary Syndrome/
4 unstable angina$.tw.
5 coronary syndrome$.tw.
6 myocardial infarct$.tw.
7 heart infarct$.tw.
8 nstemi.tw.
9 unstable coronary.tw.
10 or/1-8
11 (isch?emi$ adj3 guid$).tw.
12 (early adj3 invasive$).tw.
13 (early adj3 conservative$).tw.
56Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
14 (isch?emi$ adj3 strateg$).tw.
15 (conservative adj3 (strateg$ or therapy or therapies or treatment$ or management)).tw.
16 (interventional adj3 (strateg$ or therapy or therapies or treatment$ or management)).tw.
17 (invasive adj3 (strateg$ or therap$ or treatment$ or management)).tw.
18 (triage adj3 angiograph$).tw.
19 or/11-18
20 10 and 19
21 controlled study/
22 clinical trial/
23 major clinical study/
24 random$.tw.
25 randomized controlled trial/
26 trial$.tw.
27 compar$.tw.
28 control$.tw.
29 follow-up.tw.
30 blind$.tw.
31 double blind procedure/
32 placebo$.tw.
33 clinical article/
34 placebo/
35 doubl$.tw.
36 or/21-35
37 20 and 36
38 limit 37 to yr=“1996 - 2008”
MEDLINE (Ovid) search for 2006 version of the review
#1 explode ’Myocardial-Infarction’ /
#2 explode ’Angina-Unstable’ /
#3 unstable angina$
#4 coronary syndrome$
#5 myocardial infarct$
#6 myocardial infarction heart infarct$
#7 nstemi
#8 unstable coronary
#9 #1 or #2 or #3 or #4 or #5 or #6 or #7 or #8
#10 ischaemi$ adj3 guid$
#11 ischemi$ adj3 guid$
#12 early adj3 invasive
#13 invasive adj3 conservative
#14 ischemi$ adj3 strateg$
#15 ischaemi$ adj3 strateg$
#16 conservative adj3 strateg$
#17 conservative adj3 therap$
#18 conservative adj3 treatment$
#19 conservative adj3 management
#20 interventional adj3 strateg$
#21 interventional adj3 therap$
#22 interventional adj3 treatment$
#23 interventional adj3 management
#24 invasive adj3 strateg$
#25 invasive adj3 therap$
57Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
#26 invasive adj3 treatment$
#27 invasive adj3 management
#28 triage adj3 angiograph$
#29 #10 or #11 or #12 or #13 or #14 or #15 or #16 or #17 or #18 or #19 or #20 or #21 or #22 or #23 or #24 or #25 or #26 or #27
or #28
#30 #9 and #29
A randomized controlled trial filter was used as described in the Cochrane Handbook.
W H A T ’ S N E W
Last assessed as up-to-date: 13 August 2008.
Date Event Description
27 February 2009 New search has been performed The search was updated to February 2008. Twenty-two
additional potentially relevant references were identi-
fied. Five references reporting on two studies were sub-
sequently excluded. The remaining 14 references were
additional reports of already included studies. Long-
term follow-up data from the ICTUS trial have been
added
27 February 2009 New citation required but conclusions have not
changed
Change of authors.
H I S T O R Y
Protocol first published: Issue 2, 2004
Review first published: Issue 3, 2006
Date Event Description
27 October 2008 Amended Converted to new review format.
5 March 2006 New citation required and conclusions have changed Substantive amendment
58Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
C O N T R I B U T I O N S O F A U T H O R S
MRH is the primary author of the review. He was involved in writing and designing the review and in data extraction and analysis.
CNA provided advice regarding inclusion criteria and the clinical end-points.
IAS assisted in the drafting of the research question, providing background literature, and in reviewing protocol methods.
D E C L A R A T I O N S O F I N T E R E S T
CN Aroney has received travel grants from Boston Scientific, J&J, Medtronic, MSD, Eli Lilly.
I N D E X T E R M SMedical Subject Headings (MeSH)
∗Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary [adverse effects]; ∗Stents; Angina, Unstable [mortality; surgery; ∗therapy]; Coronary Angiography;
Coronary Artery Disease [therapy]; Myocardial Infarction [mortality; surgery; ∗therapy]; Platelet Glycoprotein GPIIb-IIIa Complex
[antagonists & inhibitors]; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sex Factors
MeSH check words
Female; Humans; Male
59Early invasive versus conservative strategies for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction in the stent era (Review)
Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.